Not upheld: unfair settlement valuation / total loss claim complaint against Advantage Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S complained about Advantage Insurance's settlement of £9,800 (after excess and pre-accident damage deduction) for his vehicle written off in an October 2025 accident. Mr S disputed the valuation, arguing the vehicle was worth £11,500 based on market adverts, recent £685 in upgrades, and the vehicle's good condition, and claimed he was left with a £900 shortfall on outstanding finance. Advantage maintained its position based on industry valuation guides showing an average value of £10,600 and identified pre-accident damage totalling £326 in repairs. The ombudsman upheld Advantage's settlement, finding it fell within industry guide ranges, was supported by comparable market adverts, and was justified by evidence of pre-accident damage corroborated by engineer reports, salvage photographs, and MOT history.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the standard approach for motor insurance valuations: first checking whether the settlement falls within industry guide ranges, then assessing whether it is supported by other evidence including garage reports, professional opinions, and market adverts. The ombudsman found that Advantage's valuation of £10,604.50 was supported by industry guides and corroborated by market adverts for vehicles with similar mileage (ranging £10,000-£11,000). The ombudsman accepted the evidence of pre-accident damage from the engineer's report, salvage yard photographs, and MOT history, finding that Advantage's deduction of £326 was reasonable and actually more generous than the standard 50% approach. The ombudsman rejected Mr S's arguments that recent upgrades should increase value and that higher-priced adverts reflected realistic market value, noting that asking prices are subject to negotiation and do not always reflect actual value.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website