Veste

Not upheld: Account administration errors complaint against Collingwood Insurance Services (U.K.) Limited

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5728915 of 2025-10-13T00:00:00+00:00. Account administration errors complaint against Collingwood Insurance Services (U.K.) Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-5728915
Decision date2025-10-13T00:00:00+00:00
FirmCollingwood Insurance Services (U.K.) Limited
ProductMotor insurance
Claim typeAccount administration errors
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone. The complaint was not upheld.

Summary

Miss E complained about £75 setup and £40 cancellation fees charged by insurance broker Collingwood when she cancelled her learner driver motor insurance policy after 18 days. She argued the fees were not clearly explained and were unfair, particularly given her age and inexperience with insurance contracts. Collingwood maintained the fees were clearly disclosed in its terms of business document which Miss E confirmed reading before purchase. The ombudsman found the fees were reasonably available to Miss E during the sales process and clearly stated in the terms of business, and that Collingwood acted fairly and in line with its Consumer Duty obligations, therefore not upholding the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that although Miss E felt overwhelmed by the amount of information presented due to her age and inexperience, the fees were clearly disclosed in Collingwood's terms of business which she was required to confirm reading before purchase. The information was reasonably available and the fees were not unreasonable given that Collingwood incurs costs regardless of policy duration. The ombudsman noted this service cannot require firms to change procedures, only determine if they acted fairly and in line with their terms and Consumer Duty obligations.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Collingwood Insurance Services (U.K.) Limited, all decisions144%
Account administration errors, all decisions26,54425%
Motor insurance, all decisions24,10335%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website