Not upheld: claims handling - dispute over repair costs and parts pricing complaint against Acromas Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B claimed on his motor insurance policy for car repairs and selected a garage after obtaining three quotes. Acromas agreed to pay £250 for a replacement part based on the garage engineer's initial quote, which fell within the market range of £160-£280. The garage subsequently sent a second invoice claiming the part cost £550, alleging a typing error on the first invoice. Acromas offered to pay the additional £300 only if Mr B provided a parts receipt. The ombudsman found Acromas acted fairly and reasonably in relying on the initial £250 quote and in requesting evidence to validate any additional payment, and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Acromas acted fairly by accepting the initial £250 quote from the garage engineer, which fell within the reasonable market range of £160-£280 for aftermarket parts. The ombudsman considered it fair and reasonable for Acromas to request a parts receipt to validate any claim for the additional £300, as this is standard practice for validating claims. The ombudsman rejected Mr B's complaint about being asked to obtain the receipt from the garage, noting that Mr B chose the garage and had the relationship with it. No compensation was warranted as Acromas had not made any error and had progressed the claim reasonably.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website