Not upheld: mis-selling — alleged misrepresentation regarding policy coverage complaint against Adrian Flux Insurance Services Group

Decision detail

Summary

Mr J purchased a manufacturer-branded motorcycle insurance policy from Adrian Flux in early 2025, selecting Third Party Only cover. He claimed he was induced to buy the policy based on online marketing stating it included replacement cover for newly registered bikes written off within six months. When his motorcycle was damaged and deemed a write-off, the insurer denied his claim as replacement cover was not available under TPO cover. Mr J complained that Adrian Flux mis-sold the policy. The ombudsman found the complaint not upheld, determining that the replacement cover exclusion was clearly stated in the policy wording and IPID, and Mr J had not mentioned replacement cover during the purchase calls or identified the exclusion when reviewing the documents.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while the online marketing material mentioned replacement cover, the policy wording and IPID clearly excluded 'Loss or damage to the insured vehicle' and stated that replacement cover was not available under TPO cover. Although Mr J claimed replacement cover was the key reason for purchase, he did not mention or ask about this cover during the three phone calls with Adrian Flux. The ombudsman concluded that the cover was set out clearly in the policy documents and it was unfortunate that Mr J did not identify the lack of replacement cover when reviewing the documents, but this did not constitute a failure by Adrian Flux.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website