Not upheld: claims assessment and service quality complaint against Great Lakes Insurance UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained to Great Lakes Insurance about a 21-hour flight delay on his return journey, arguing he should receive cancellation benefit rather than the £30 travel delay benefit paid. Great Lakes also acknowledged poor service by not updating Mr B about his claim and paid £50 compensation. The ombudsman found the travel delay benefit was the correct policy section to apply since Mr B's holiday proceeded as planned, making the £30 payment appropriate. Although Great Lakes could have communicated better, the claim was paid promptly and the £50 compensation was reasonable, so the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied ICOBS rules requiring insurers to assess claims promptly and fairly. The policy clearly defined travel delay benefit as applicable when flights are delayed due to specified causes including mechanical breakdown. Since Mr B's flight was delayed (not cancelled) and his holiday proceeded, the travel delay benefit was the appropriate policy section, not cancellation benefit. The £30 payment correctly reflected the benefit table for the first full 12 hours of delay. Although Great Lakes provided poor service by not updating Mr B, the claim was paid promptly and the £50 compensation was reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website