Not upheld: claim declined - application of policy exclusion complaint against Accredited Insurance (Europe) Ltd

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S and Miss H claimed for damage to a double-glazing patio door that shattered on a very hot day in August 2025. Accredited declined the claim citing an exclusion for damage caused by exposure to atmospheric conditions. The ombudsman initially upheld the complaint, finding Accredited had not adequately evidenced the exclusion. However, after Accredited provided an expert report explaining that windows can spontaneously shatter due to nickel sulphide inclusion being affected by natural heating cycles, the ombudsman reconsidered. The ombudsman concluded this was the most likely cause and that the exclusion fairly applied, so the complaint was not upheld and no remedy was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman initially found the claim should be upheld as Accredited had not adequately evidenced the exclusion for gradual causes. However, after receiving Accredited's expert glass specialist report explaining that windows can spontaneously shatter due to nickel sulphide inclusion being impacted by natural heating cycles over time, the ombudsman reconsidered. The ombudsman concluded that thermal expansion and nickel sulphide inclusion are related phenomena both falling within the exclusion for damage caused by atmospheric conditions and gradual causes. While acknowledging the rarity of such occurrences, the ombudsman found this was the most likely cause based on the available evidence and that Accredited's decline was therefore fair and reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website