Not upheld: Investment mis-selling complaint against Howden UK Brokers Limited

Decision detail

Summary

N, a sports club, complained that Howden UK Brokers Limited mis-sold a club insurance policy by failing to adequately explain that physiotherapy cover was conditional on total disablement. When N claimed for physiotherapy costs for injured players in 2025, the claim was rejected because the players did not meet the definition of total disablement required to trigger the cover. The ombudsman found that Howden should have provided clearer information and advice about these conditions, but declined to uphold the complaint because there was no evidence the claim would have been met even with proper advice, meaning N suffered no loss directly attributable to Howden's failings.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Howden, as an independent broker making an advised sale, should have provided clearer information about the personal accident cover and specifically advised N about the conditions attached to physiotherapy cover, particularly the need for total disablement. However, the ombudsman concluded that even with better advice, N would likely have obtained the policy anyway as it provided other essential covers (buildings, contents, public liability). Critically, even if N had opted for temporary total disablement cover as a result of better advice, the claim would still not have been met because there was no evidence that any of the injured players suffered total disablement as defined in the policy. Therefore, N would be in the same financial position regardless of Howden's conduct, meaning no loss directly resulted from Howden's failings.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website