Partially upheld: Service failures generally complaint against INSURE & GO INSURANCE SERVICES LIMITED
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5772457 of 2025-09-18T00:00:00+00:00. Service failures generally complaint against INSURE & GO INSURANCE SERVICES LIMITED. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5772457 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2025-09-18T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | INSURE & GO INSURANCE SERVICES LIMITED |
| Product | Travel insurance |
| Claim type | Service failures generally |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | £100 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by failure to provide timely callback. Payment due within 28 days of Mr O's acceptance of the decision, with interest at 8% simple per annum if paid later. |
Summary
Mr O purchased a travel insurance policy on 21 November 2024 for travel starting 23 November, but his trip actually began on 22 November 2024. He called Insure & Go on 22 November requesting the dates be changed and was told the firm would urgently contact him back. Insure & Go failed to call him back that day, only contacting him the following day after his trip had started. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding the delayed callback caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience, but rejected the claim that Insure & Go was responsible for the lack of valid cover since Mr O was aware of the situation. Insure & Go was directed to pay £100 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while Insure & Go was not responsible for the initial policy purchase error or claims administration, it failed to meet good practice standards by not calling Mr O back on the same day with an update. Given that Insure & Go knew Mr O was starting his trip that day and was expecting urgent contact, the failure to provide timely communication caused unnecessary distress and inconvenience. However, Mr O was aware he lacked valid cover and could have mitigated losses by obtaining alternative insurance, so Insure & Go was not held responsible for the lack of cover itself. The refund of premium was Mr O's entitlement under the cooling off period, not compensation for the service failure.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| INSURE & GO INSURANCE SERVICES LIMITED, all decisions | 5 | 10% |
| Service failures generally, all decisions | 32,767 | 33% |
| Travel insurance, all decisions | 7,644 | 37% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website