Upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Wakam UK Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5944117 of 2026-01-21T00:00:00+00:00. Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Wakam UK Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5944117 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-01-21T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Wakam UK Limited |
| Product | Motor insurance |
| Claim type | Motor insurance, claim handling |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | Wakam UK Limited must pay: (1) £250 total compensation for distress and inconvenience; (2) reimbursement of hire costs incurred from 6 May 2025 to 6 June 2025 plus 8% simple interest per year from date costs were incurred, subject to Mr S providing evidence of charges; (3) 8% simple interest per year on compensation from settlement deadline to payment date if paid after 28 days. |
Summary
Mr S claimed on his commercial vehicle insurance policy for van damage in March 2025. The van was taken for repairs in May 2025 but experienced significant delays due to parts availability, with a critical part having a 2-3 month manufacturer lead time. Wakam failed to explore alternative solutions such as early write-off despite being aware early on of the extended delays. Mr S reasonably hired replacement vans at approximately £3,700 over four months to continue working. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, requiring Wakam to pay £250 compensation plus reimbursement of hire costs from 6 May to 6 June 2025 with interest, finding Wakam failed to manage the claim fairly and should have considered providing hire vehicle support given the extended delay.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Although the repairer was not responsible for parts delays, Wakam as the insurer remained responsible for managing the claim fairly and timely. Wakam failed to explore alternative solutions when aware early on of potential months-long delays. The policy did not define what a 'courtesy car' would be, and Mr S was never offered one despite availability being a condition. Given the extended delay, Wakam should have considered providing a hire vehicle beyond policy terms to reduce disruption. Mr S reasonably mitigated his loss by hiring replacement vans to continue working, and the hire charges of approximately £925 per month were reasonable for commercial van rates.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Wakam UK Limited, all decisions | 16 | 69% |
| Motor insurance, claim handling, all decisions | 12,798 | 32% |
| Motor insurance, all decisions | 24,036 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website