Not upheld: claims handling delay and procedural errors complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6150246 of 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00. claims handling delay and procedural errors complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6150246 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-15T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited |
| Product | Motor insurance |
| Claim type | claims handling delay and procedural errors |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | Admiral has already provided: settlement of total loss less policy excess with interest from one month after incident; reimbursement of temporary vehicle costs (£409.09 with interest); reimbursement of DVLA fine with interest; refund of unused premium; and £300 compensation for trouble and upset. No further remedy ordered. |
Summary
Mr H claimed on his motor insurance policy after his car was damaged in an incident and declared a total loss. Admiral delayed settlement for approximately six months, requesting unnecessary police confirmation and failing to instruct Mr H to transfer car ownership, resulting in DVLA fines and forcing Mr H to purchase a replacement vehicle using his savings. Admiral acknowledged its errors and provided redress including settlement with interest, reimbursement of costs, and £300 compensation. The ombudsman found this redress package fair and reasonable, declining to uphold the complaint despite acknowledging the delays and errors caused Mr H frustration and financial strain.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while Admiral made errors in claims handling, including unnecessary delays and failure to instruct Mr H on car ownership transfer, the firm's redress package adequately restored Mr H's financial position. Admiral's settlement with interest from one month after the incident was reasonable given validation time needed. The £300 compensation was appropriate for the trouble and upset caused over several months, particularly as Mr H was cooperative and mitigated his losses by purchasing a replacement vehicle. The ombudsman considered that Mr H was expecting some delays due to the ongoing investigation nature of the claim.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, all decisions | 1,935 | 44% |
| Motor insurance, all decisions | 23,874 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website