Partially upheld: Motor insurance, total loss valuation complaint against Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-5976784 of 2026-01-23T00:00:00+00:00. Motor insurance, total loss valuation complaint against Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-5976784 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-01-23T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited |
| Product | Motor insurance |
| Claim type | Motor insurance, total loss valuation |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited is required to settle Mr C's claim based on a valuation of £1,786. Trinity Lane may deduct the agreed excess (£150) from any settlement. If Mr C wishes to keep the bike, Trinity Lane may apply a reasonable retention fee to the settlement sum. Mr C may also be able to reclaim the excess through an 'excess protect' policy if one exists alongside his bike cover. |
Summary
Mr C complained about Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited's handling of a claim on his customised three-wheeled motorcycle, which was damaged when it fell on its side. Trinity Lane's repairer estimated repairs at £1,342.66 and valued the bike at £1,400, concluding it was uneconomical to repair. Mr C disputed this and obtained alternative valuations ranging from £1,485 to over £2,900 in repair costs. Trinity Lane initially offered a £2,000 cash-in-lieu settlement, which Mr C rejected, and later deemed the bike a total loss based on a £1,485 valuation. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding Trinity Lane's total loss determination was fair but its valuation was too low. Applying FOS methodology prioritising trade guide valuations, the ombudsman determined the fair market value was £1,786 and required Trinity Lane to settle on that basis, rejecting Mr C's claim that the bike was worth approximately £10,000.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman applied the FOS methodology for vehicle valuations, which prioritises trade guide valuations as the starting point for settlement, as they are based on nationwide research of likely selling prices and reflect the market at the date of incident. The repairer's estimate of £1,342.66 represented 75% of the trade guide valuation of £1,786, exceeding the typical 60% threshold for deeming a vehicle uneconomical to repair, making Trinity Lane's total loss decision fair. However, Trinity Lane's initial valuations (£1,400 and £1,485) were below the trade guide figure and therefore too low. The ombudsman rejected Mr C's personal valuation of £10,000 as not representative of market value, noting that personal attachment and investment in modifications do not translate to higher open market value. The ombudsman also rejected the argument that the bike was appreciating as a 'classic', as trade guides reflect market value at the date of incident regardless of appreciation trends. Money spent on maintenance does not increase vehicle value. The specialist's valuation of £500 was discounted as it lacked supporting documentation and was significantly inconsistent with other valuations.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Trinity Lane Insurance Company Limited, all decisions | 26 | 33% |
| Motor insurance, total loss valuation, all decisions | 3,418 | 34% |
| Motor insurance, all decisions | 23,874 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website