Partially upheld: claim rejection - storm damage; delay in claim handling complaint against Aviva Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D and Mrs H claimed for chimney damage under their home insurance policy following Storm Éowyn in January 2025. Aviva rejected the claim, attributing the damage to wear and tear rather than the storm. The complainants provided a stonemason's expert opinion supporting storm causation, but Aviva relied on April 2021 photos showing pre-existing deterioration and argued the selective damage pattern was inconsistent with storm damage. The ombudsman upheld Aviva's claim rejection as the damage was not consistent with typical storm damage and pre-existing deterioration was evident. However, the ombudsman partially upheld the complaint by ordering £150 compensation for Aviva's delay in handling the claim.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the three-question test for storm damage claims: (1) Did storm conditions occur? Yes. (2) Was damage consistent with storm? No - the selective damage to one stone without displacing surrounding stones was inconsistent with typical storm damage patterns. (3) Was storm the dominant cause? No - the evidence of pre-existing deterioration from April 2021, lack of maintenance since 2017, and the pattern of damage suggested wear and tear was the dominant cause. Aviva's evidence from 2021 photos showing deterioration was found more persuasive than the stonemason's post-event opinion. The neighbour's settlement with a different insurer was not considered as each case is assessed on its own merits.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website