Upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against AXA Insurance UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs C complained that AXA unfairly declined their claim for a stolen Rolex watch from a gym locker. Mrs C had locked the watch in a locker, then left it unlocked while drying her hair nearby with the locker in her line of sight. AXA declined the claim stating the watch was not in Mrs C's care, custody or control. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that the watch was in Mrs C's care or custody as she was guarding it from close distance, and that AXA's interpretation of the policy exclusion was unreasonable. AXA was directed to reconsider the claim and pay £150 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman interpreted 'care, custody or control' using normal everyday meaning: care means looking after an item in close proximity while protecting it; custody means guarding from close distance; control means being within touching distance. The policy uses 'or' between these terms, so only one needs to be satisfied. The ombudsman found the watch was in Mrs C's care or custody as she was guarding it from close distance while drying her hair with the locker in her line of sight. AXA's interpretation requiring the item to be locked away or the policyholder to prevent theft was unreasonable and not supported by the policy wording.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website