Not upheld: Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against Bastion Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S claimed roadside assistance under his Bastion Insurance breakdown policy after his vehicle experienced issues on the roadside in April 2024. Bastion declined the claim because the vehicle could still move under its own power, not meeting the policy definition of 'immobile'. Mr S complained that despite being broken down and vulnerable, the policy should have covered him, and that Bastion's questioning during complaint handling implied fraud. The ombudsman found the policy terms were clear and the vehicle was mobile by the policy's definition, making Bastion's decision fair and reasonable. The ombudsman also found Bastion's offer to waive cancellation fees was adequate redress for any complaint handling concerns.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the policy terms were clear and unambiguous in requiring a vehicle to be immobile to qualify as a breakdown. Since Mr S's vehicle could move under its own power, it did not meet the policy definition. The ombudsman noted that the purpose of breakdown cover is to allow customers to continue their journey or reach a repairer, which would not be necessary if the vehicle remains drivable. Regarding the alleged fraud implication, without a recording of that call, the ombudsman found it more likely the handler was seeking clarification on desired resolution, and Bastion's offer to waive cancellation fees was appropriate redress.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website