Not upheld: claims handling, service quality, reasonable adjustments, appointment of legal representatives complaint against ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6041284 of 2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00. claims handling, service quality, reasonable adjustments, appointment of legal representatives complaint against ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6041284 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited |
| Product | Other regulated product |
| Claim type | claims handling, service quality, reasonable adjustments, appointment of legal representatives |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. The complaint was not upheld. |
Summary
Miss B complained about ARAG's handling of her legal expenses insurance claim for a personal injury matter. She was unhappy with law firm D's representation, the delay in appointing a replacement law firm after D became conflicted, and alleged ARAG failed to make reasonable adjustments for her disabilities. ARAG appointed law firm C as replacement, which instructed a barrister who advised the settlement offer was reasonable, which Miss B accepted. The ombudsman found ARAG acted fairly in appointing D as suitably qualified, was not responsible for delays caused by other law firms' assessment processes, and reasonably relied on Miss B's stated communication requirements for reasonable adjustments. The complaint was not upheld.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that ARAG acted fairly and reasonably in appointing D as a suitably qualified law firm, as D was an experienced senior solicitor in litigation and personal injury despite not being formally accredited by a named traumatic brain injury association. The ombudsman could not consider complaints about the general legal advice or service provided by independent legal representatives, as they are not under ARAG's control and have their own regulators. Regarding the delay in appointing replacement counsel, the ombudsman found ARAG was not responsible for delays caused by M's assessment process or S's decision to decline representation. The ombudsman found ARAG acted promptly once M declined to represent Miss B. Regarding reasonable adjustments, the ombudsman found it was fair for ARAG to rely on Miss B's stated requirements and that the one formatting error was promptly corrected. The ombudsman found no compelling evidence that the volume of documents discouraged law firms from representing Miss B, and that ARAG was actively monitoring the claim.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited, all decisions | 94 | 26% |
| Other regulated product, all decisions | 52,408 | 30% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website