Upheld: Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against Markel International Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs S held a landlord's rent and legal protection insurance policy with Markel covering eviction costs and rental arrears. When her tenant failed to pay rent from September 2023, Mrs S made a claim for both legal costs and rent arrears. Markel accepted the legal costs claim but refused the rent arrears claim on three grounds: the s21 notice was served by a letting agent (not an appropriately qualified representative), Mrs S had not reoccupied the property, and no eviction claim had been accepted. The ombudsman upheld Mrs S's complaint, finding that the letting agents qualified as appropriately qualified representatives under the policy's broad definition, that a claim for eviction had been accepted when Markel approved it and appointed solicitors, and that there was no evidence of improper notice service. Markel was ordered to pay the rent arrears claim with interest and £150 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that: (1) a claim for eviction had been made and accepted by Markel when it approved the claim and appointed solicitors, even though the tenant left before legal action was necessary; (2) the policy's exclusion for rent arrears was ambiguous regarding whether both conditions (reoccupancy and representative advice) needed to be met, and should be interpreted as requiring either condition; (3) the letting agents qualified as 'appropriately qualified persons' under the policy definition because the policy included accountants (not legally qualified) for tax matters, demonstrating that legal qualification was not required; (4) there was no evidence the s21 notice was improperly served and Markel provided no evidence of prejudice from the letting agent's involvement.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website