Veste

Not upheld: claim settlement dispute - extent of water damage coverage complaint against Red Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6084228 of 2026-04-29T00:00:00+00:00. claim settlement dispute - extent of water damage coverage complaint against Red Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6084228
Decision date2026-04-29T00:00:00+00:00
FirmRed Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited
ProductHome insurance
Claim typeclaim settlement dispute - extent of water damage coverage
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNone ordered. Red Sands' settlement offer of £9,000 stands as fair.

Summary

Ms M claimed for water damage to her property following an escape from a pressurized vessel in June 2022. Red Sands offered £9,000 settlement based on their loss adjuster's assessment, but Ms M disputed this, claiming costs were £79,000 and that new flooring was needed throughout. The ombudsman reviewed the evidence, including Ms M's own flooring specialist report, which showed damage was primarily in the hallway and landing with bedroom floors remaining flat. Finding that Red Sands' offer fairly reflected the evidenced damage and that the firm acted reasonably in offering to consider additional information, the ombudsman did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman focused on what damage could be evidenced as directly caused by the leak. The flooring specialist's own report supported Red Sands' position by showing cupping and gapping primarily in the hallway and landing, with bedroom floors remaining flat and no significant damage to other rooms. The evidence did not support replacement flooring throughout the property. Red Sands' offer was fair as it addressed the evidenced damage, and their willingness to consider additional information was reasonable.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Red Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited, all decisions99449%
Home insurance, all decisions20,66838%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website