Upheld: claim handling — inadequate investigation, delays in identifying cause of water damage, failure to reassess when damage continued complaint against Aviva Insurance Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6112604 of 2026-04-08T00:00:00+00:00. claim handling — inadequate investigation, delays in identifying cause of water damage, failure to reassess when damage continued complaint against Aviva Insurance Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6112604 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-08T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Aviva Insurance Limited |
| Product | insurance — buildings/property insurance |
| Claim type | claim handling — inadequate investigation, delays in identifying cause of water damage, failure to reassess when damage continued |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | 1. Pay additional £350 compensation for distress and inconvenience (in addition to £400 already awarded). 2. Consider and pay reasonable costs Mr H submits evidence for regarding financial losses caused by tenant leaving (electricity, water rates, council tax, energy usage for drying works), subject to Mr H demonstrating tenant responsibility, plus 8% simple interest from date paid until reimbursement. 3. Do not waive the £2,500 policy excess. |
Summary
Mr H complained about Aviva's handling of a water damage claim on his tenanted rental flat. A damp patch reported in July 2024 was later identified as resulting from a leak in the flat above, but the true cause (rainwater and soil pipe issues) was not identified until June 2025 by the freeholder's investigations. Aviva had arranged a leak detection inspection in December 2024 but failed to reassess when water ingress continued, causing the property to become uninhabitable and the tenant to move out. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, directing Aviva to pay an additional £350 compensation for distress and inconvenience, consider tenant-related expenses with 8% interest as part of the loss of rent claim, but not waive the £2,500 policy excess.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
While Aviva was entitled to rely on professional reports, it was fair and reasonable for them to reassess and investigate further once it became clear the water damage problem was ongoing and the property became uninhabitable. The extended handling and lack of clarity around the source of the leak caused significant disruption and inconvenience to Mr H beyond what was already acknowledged in the first complaint response. However, the policy excess should not be waived as policyholders are contractually required to pay their excess in normal claim processes, and compensation adequately addresses the service shortfall. Tenant-related expenses should be covered as part of the loss of rent claim in line with industry practice.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Aviva Insurance Limited, all decisions | 5,078 | 27% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website