Not upheld: claims handling - request for second interview and refusal to accept written responses complaint against Aviva Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained to the Financial Ombudsman Service about Aviva Insurance Limited's request for a second face-to-face interview regarding his flood damage claim, preferring to answer questions in writing. After initially declining, Mr B later provided medical evidence of poor mental health. Aviva maintained that a face-to-face interview was necessary due to inconsistencies in information about alternative accommodation costs and contents claims, and offered accommodations including allowing Mr B to be accompanied. The ombudsman found Aviva's request was reasonable and fair, in line with policy terms allowing reasonable enquiries, and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found no evidence that Aviva acted outside relevant rules or treated Mr B unfairly. Aviva had legitimate concerns about inconsistencies in information provided regarding alternative accommodation and contents claims, which justified the need for a second face-to-face interview. The policy terms allow Aviva to carry out reasonable enquiries and require Mr B's co-operation. Although Mr B provided medical evidence of vulnerability, this did not persuade the ombudsman that the request for a face-to-face interview was unreasonable or that Aviva failed to take his vulnerability into account. Aviva offered reasonable accommodations including allowing Mr B to be accompanied and providing an agenda in advance.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website