Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Motors Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained about the service provided by Motors Insurance Company Limited when handling his tyre care policy claim for a puncture. MICL initially assessed the tyre as repairable but ultimately provided a temporary repair followed by a replacement tyre. Mr M was unhappy with the claims process, the classification of his vehicle as premium rather than high performance, and the tone of MICL's agent. The ombudsman found that MICL correctly applied the policy terms which prioritise repair over replacement and do not differentiate between vehicle types. The ombudsman upheld MICL's offer of £25 compensation for the inappropriate agent comment as fair and reasonable, and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that MICL's initial assessment of the tyre as repairable was reasonable based on the location of the nail and tread depth. The policy terms clearly state that repair is the first port of call where deemed repairable, and the policy does not make allowances for different vehicle types. While the agent's comment about the vehicle classification was unnecessary and inappropriate, MICL's apology and £25 compensation was proportionate to this service failing. The temporary repair followed by replacement was in line with the policy terms.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website