Veste

Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against Qmetric Group Limited

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5407964 of 2025-06-02T00:00:00+00:00. Account administration errors complaint against Qmetric Group Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-5407964
Decision date2025-06-02T00:00:00+00:00
FirmQmetric Group Limited
ProductHome insurance
Claim typeAccount administration errors
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNo remedy ordered. Qmetric had already refunded the £30 cancellation fee.

Summary

Mr P complained that Qmetric refused to process a mid-term address change on his home insurance policy when he moved home in May 2024, instead requiring him to cancel and take out a new policy subject to a cancellation fee and higher premiums. Qmetric explained its systems lacked functionality for mid-term address changes and that property-specific questions needed updating. The ombudsman found Qmetric's decision reasonable given the address change fundamentally altered the insured risk, and that Mr P had been adequately informed through policy documents that changes could result in cancellation. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Qmetric's decision to require a new policy was reasonable because the change of address would have fundamentally altered almost the entirety of the risk being insured, requiring updates to many property-specific questions. The ombudsman determined that Mr P was provided with sufficient information through the IPID and policy terms that he needed to contact Qmetric if circumstances changed, and that this could result in policy cancellation. The ombudsman was not persuaded that even had Qmetric disclosed its system limitations upfront, Mr P would have made a different decision, as the policy specifics and price would have been the driving factors.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Qmetric Group Limited, all decisions4614%
Account administration errors, all decisions25,84425%
Home insurance, all decisions21,29338%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website