Not upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Saga Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained to Saga Services Limited, his insurance broker, after not being offered a contents insurance renewal. Saga initially told Mr M that no insurers on its panel would cover his postcode, leading Mr M to feel discriminated against. Upon complaint, Saga acknowledged errors in its letter, including mischaracterizing the policy as buildings insurance and incorrectly stating that all insurers declined based on postcode; in fact, only one insurer declined for that reason. The ombudsman found that Saga's role was to present Mr M's details accurately to insurers, which it did, and that the insurers' underwriting decisions were not Saga's responsibility. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman determined that Saga's role as a broker is to present the customer's details accurately to insurers, not to make underwriting decisions. Having reviewed the information Saga provided to insurers, the ombudsman was satisfied it was presented accurately. The insurers' decisions to decline cover were based on their own underwriting criteria and risk assessment, not Saga's responsibility. While Saga made errors in its communication to Mr M (mischaracterizing the policy type and overstating the scope of declinations), it corrected these errors promptly when Mr M complained, and the ombudsman found this sufficient.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website