Not upheld: PPI mis-selling complaint against Utility Warehouse Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms M complained that UWL mis-sold her a bill protector insurance policy, claiming she had never agreed to it. In November 2013, UWL converted Ms M's existing membership into a regulated insurance product covering bills in case of redundancy, accident or long-term illness. Ms M did not complain until January 2025. The ombudsman found that UWL provided clear information in the November 2013 letter, gave Ms M the opportunity to cancel, and sent ongoing communications and bills from 2021 to 2025. The ombudsman rejected Ms M's claims of duplicate cover and ineligibility as unsupported and concluded that UWL did not mis-sell the policy or act unfairly, so the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that UWL complied with its obligations by providing clear, fair and not misleading information in the November 2013 letter explaining the conversion from membership to insurance. No explicit consent or signature was required at the time, as the letter clearly stated Ms M could cancel if she did not want the policy. The ombudsman was satisfied that Ms M ought reasonably to have been aware of the policy's existence given the multiple communications and bills from 2021 onwards, and she had multiple opportunities to cancel. The ombudsman rejected Ms M's claims that she had duplicate cover or was ineligible to claim, finding no supporting evidence. The ombudsman concluded that insurance premiums are generally retained by underwriters regardless of claims made, so no refund was justified.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website