Not upheld: poor service and unclear communication in insurance policy arrangement; alleged mis-selling complaint against Clegg Gifford & Co Limited

Decision detail

Summary

C, a limited company, complained that Clegg Gifford mis-sold a commercial insurance policy for a holiday let estate in May 2024, claiming key aspects of cover were unclear and documentation was inadequate. C sought a full refund of premiums, arguing the policy did not meet its needs and caused business disruption. Clegg Gifford acknowledged service failings and offered £250 compensation. The ombudsman found clear evidence of poor service and communication but no deliberate mis-selling or financial loss, as the policy ran for its full term with no claims and no uncovered insured events occurred. The ombudsman upheld the £250 compensation as fair and reasonable, declining to order a premium refund.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

While the ombudsman found clear evidence of poor service, unclear communication, and inadequate documentation, there was no persuasive evidence of deliberate misleading or dishonesty. The key issue was whether the service failings caused financial loss. Since the policy remained in place, ran for its full term with no claims, and no insured event occurred that wasn't covered, no financial loss was demonstrated. The subsequent cheaper policy in 2025 does not prove financial loss as insurance pricing varies between providers and years. The ombudsman also noted that as C is a limited company (separate legal entity), compensation awards must reflect business-level impact rather than personal distress to directors.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website