Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms A sent her motorhome to company B for a habitation check, providing both sets of keys. During discussions about the motorhome's value, B offered to sell it for 8% commission. B subsequently sold the motorhome without Ms A's explicit consent and without paying her the proceeds before going into liquidation. Ms A claimed on her Trinity Lane insurance policy, but the insurer refused citing the policy's exclusion for theft by deception. The ombudsman upheld Trinity Lane's refusal, finding the exclusion was clearly stated, commonly used in motor insurance, and applied equally to all policyholders, and that the policy contained no cover for loss of funds from sales or third-party actions regardless.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Trinity Lane correctly applied the policy terms. The policy explicitly excludes theft by deception, which is a common and permissible exclusion under FCA regulations. Additionally, the policy provides no cover for loss of funds following a sale or for actions of third parties like B. Regardless of whether the situation constitutes theft by deception or an unauthorized sale, no policy term provides coverage. The ombudsman noted that while Ms A's discussions with B about sale price and her provision of both keys raised questions about consent, this does not create a duty for Trinity Lane to cover the loss.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website