Not upheld: Other regulated complaint complaint against TICORP Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs M purchased travel insurance from TICORP and made a claim after Mr M was injured abroad. The insurer applied two £99 excesses to the claim settlement because the claim covered two separate sections of the policy. Mr and Mrs M complained that TICORP's website had misled them into thinking only one excess would apply. The ombudsman found the website was not misleading as it provided only a snapshot of features and directed customers to the full policy terms, which clearly stated separate excesses for each section. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the website only provided a snapshot of main features and clearly directed customers to view the full policy terms for complete details. The reference to a £99 excess as a feature was not misleading because this was the maximum excess applicable to any single section. Separate excess charges for different sections of cover is standard practice in travel insurance and did not require particular emphasis. The policy terms made clear what excess applied to each section.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website