Partially upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Aioi Nissay Dowa Insurance UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs H's parked car was hit by an unidentified third party vehicle. Although CCTV footage and a police reference number were available, the police could not identify the driver. ANDI repaired the car but recorded the claim as 'fault' because it could not recover costs from an untraced driver, affecting Mrs H's no claims discount and requiring her to pay the excess. The ombudsman found ANDI's fault classification reasonable but upheld the complaint in part, finding ANDI failed to take sufficient proactive steps to trace the driver, requiring Mrs H to repeatedly chase for updates. ANDI was ordered to pay £300 compensation and pursue additional tracing avenues before directing Mrs H to the Motor Insurers Bureau.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that ANDI's decision to record the claim as 'fault' was reasonable because the third party driver could not be traced, meaning ANDI had no one to recover costs from. This is standard practice in motor insurance. However, the ombudsman concluded that ANDI failed to take sufficient proactive steps to trace the driver in a timely manner. Mrs H had to repeatedly chase ANDI for updates, and ANDI did not challenge inconsistent police responses until prompted by Mrs H. ANDI also failed to explain why it could not pass CCTV footage to police, and did not pursue alternative tracing methods such as contacting the witness via the phone number provided or attempting to trace the vehicle owner through the DVLA. While the police themselves were unsuccessful in tracing the driver, ANDI should have exhausted all reasonable avenues before closing the claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website