Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Clegg Gifford & Co Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5569665 of 2018-12-14T00:00:00+00:00. Service failures generally complaint against Clegg Gifford & Co Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5569665 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2018-12-14T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Clegg Gifford & Co Limited |
| Product | Motor insurance |
| Claim type | Service failures generally |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Clegg Gifford & Co Limited must: (1) provide a letter to W confirming they did not make enough contact to inform Mr D the policy was due for renewal and that they would act as insurer and consider any claims made during the uninsured period; (2) pay £75 compensation for inconvenience if not already paid; (3) pay within 28 days with 8% simple interest per annum if payment is delayed. |
Summary
Mr D, on behalf of his limited company W, complained that Clegg Gifford failed to notify him of his motor trade vehicle insurance policy renewal, resulting in him driving without insurance. Clegg Gifford had also incorrectly identified Mr D as having a criminal conviction during background checks, though this was later confirmed as mistaken identity. The ombudsman found that while policyholders bear responsibility for maintaining coverage, Clegg Gifford had established a pattern of sending renewal reminders in previous years and broke this pattern by sending only one letter. The ombudsman was satisfied that had Mr D received the expected notification, he would have renewed on time, as demonstrated by his immediate renewal upon learning of the lapse. The complaint was upheld and Clegg Gifford was required to provide an explanatory letter and pay £75 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Although it is ultimately the policyholder's responsibility to maintain insurance, Clegg Gifford had established a pattern of sending renewal reminders in previous years. By breaking this pattern and only sending one renewal letter instead of multiple reminders as in prior years, Clegg Gifford failed to meet good industry practice standards. The ombudsman was satisfied that had Mr D received the expected renewal notification, he would have renewed on time, as evidenced by his immediate renewal upon learning of the lapse and his consistent renewal history. The firm's error in failing to provide adequate notice directly caused Mr D to drive without insurance.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Clegg Gifford & Co Limited, all decisions | 8 | 44% |
| Service failures generally, all decisions | 32,767 | 33% |
| Motor insurance, all decisions | 24,036 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website