Not upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Lloyds Bank General Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S claimed that kitchen floor damage in July 2025 resulted from faulty repair work completed by Lloyds' contractor in 2018 under an escape of water claim. Lloyds declined the claim, citing the twelve-month guarantee period for contractor work and the unusual nature of issues presenting seven years later, but offered to review independent evidence. Mr S provided a builder's report to the FOS dated 12 July 2025, but this was not provided to Lloyds during the complaint process. The ombudsman found Lloyds acted fairly and reasonably in requiring independent evidence before accepting liability for a claim arising years after the original policy had ceased, and in maintaining its position when no such evidence was initially provided.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found it reasonable for Lloyds to require independent evidence before accepting liability for a claim arising seven years after the original repair work, particularly given the policy had ceased. The ombudsman noted that the independent report was dated after Lloyds' response and was not provided to Lloyds during the complaint process, so Lloyds could not have acted unfairly in maintaining its position. The ombudsman confirmed Lloyds' offer to review independent evidence was fair, and that Lloyds has now agreed to review the report provided to the FOS.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website