Veste

Not upheld: claims handling and communication failure complaint against Tradex Insurance Company Limited

Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6177828 of 2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00. claims handling and communication failure complaint against Tradex Insurance Company Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.

Decision detail

ReferenceDRN-6177828
Decision date2026-06-09T00:00:00+00:00
FirmTradex Insurance Company Limited
ProductMotor insurance
Claim typeclaims handling and communication failure
OutcomeNot upheld
RemedyNo additional remedy directed. The £150 compensation already offered by Tradex was deemed fair and reasonable.

Summary

Mrs M complained that Tradex Insurance Company Limited mishandled her motor insurance claim by failing to notify her that a third party claim had been settled as a fault claim and her nine-year no-claims discount had been reduced to three years. The ombudsman found that the policy terms clearly showed the NCD reduction would apply to a single claim and that Tradex fairly applied these terms based on available evidence. Although Tradex failed to promptly notify Mrs M of the settlement and NCD reduction until she renewed her policy ten months later, the ombudsman determined this failure did not warrant additional compensation beyond the £150 already offered, and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Tradex clearly communicated the NCD reduction terms before purchase and fairly applied the policy term allowing it to settle the third party claim based on available evidence and Highway Code provisions. While Tradex failed to promptly notify Mrs M of the claim settlement and NCD reduction, the ombudsman was not persuaded the impact was significantly worse than if notification had occurred promptly in December 2024. The £150 compensation already offered was considered fair and reasonable under FOS guidelines for distress and inconvenience.

How this compares

GroupDecisionsUphold rate
Tradex Insurance Company Limited, all decisions6531%
Motor insurance, all decisions23,87435%

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website