Not upheld: unfair claims settlement and liability acceptance complaint against UK Insurance Limited trading as Churchill Insurance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T complained that UKI unfairly accepted liability on his behalf following a motor insurance claim arising from a low-speed collision in July 2023. Mr T claimed he was stationary when a third party car rolled forward into him, but UKI settled the claim as a 'fault' claim after the third party insurer provided a witness statement describing the incident differently. The ombudsman found that UKI fairly considered the claim based on available evidence, including the witness statement provided in standard industry format, and that Mr T's additional evidence (damage images and text messages) did not demonstrate with certainty how the damage occurred or show third party liability. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that UKI had the contractual right to decide how to settle the claim and that any decision must be fair and reasonable based on available evidence. The witness statement from the third party insurer, provided in a format consistent with industry practice and within a reasonable timeframe, was sufficient evidence for UKI to conclude it could not successfully defend the claim in court. The additional evidence provided by Mr T (damage images and text messages) did not demonstrate with certainty how the damage occurred or show third party admission of liability. The ombudsman noted that 'fault' claims are actually recorded as 'bonus disallowed' and reflect UKI's inability to recover costs from another party, not a determination of actual fault. Without evidence of fraud or CCTV footage supporting Mr T's account, the ombudsman found UKI's reliance on the witness statement reasonable.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website