Not upheld: vehicle valuation dispute and hire arrangement responsibility complaint against Ageas Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained that Ageas undervalued his written-off car at £6,200 when he believed it worth £12,500, unfairly dealt with hire arrangements, and provided poor complaints handling. The ombudsman found Ageas's valuation fair, supported by trade guides and comparable adverts for same-year vehicles with lower mileage than Mr C's 144,000-mile car. The ombudsman determined that firm A, not Ageas, arranged and managed the hire independently, with Ageas only able to remind firm A of its duty to keep costs reasonable. The ombudsman declined to review complaints handling or SAR issues as they fall outside its remit. The complaint was not upheld and no compensation was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the FOS approach to vehicle valuation, which requires consideration of national trade guides and supporting evidence. The trade guides showed a range of £3,762 to £4,940, and Ageas's offer of £6,200 was supported by adverts for same-year vehicles with lower mileage. Mr C's adverts were for newer cars with significantly lower mileage, making them not directly comparable. The mechanical work, while recent, was necessary maintenance that did not reduce the car's overall mileage and should not inflate its value. Regarding hire, the ombudsman found that firm A arranged and managed the hire independently, with Ageas only able to remind firm A of its duty to keep costs reasonable and ultimately refuse to pay unreasonable charges. Hire does not remain in place indefinitely after a final settlement offer. Complaints handling and SAR issues fall outside the ombudsman's remit and should be addressed with Ageas or the Information Commissioner respectively.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website