Not upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against First Central Underwriting Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B purchased a 2015 convertible car in January 2025 and obtained comprehensive insurance from First Central, answering 'no' to a question about modifications. When he claimed for an accident in October 2025, First Central declined the claim and voided the policy, citing misrepresentation about modifications. The car had aftermarket bodywork (rear spoiler, side skirts, front splitter) and a performance exhaust that Mr B should have identified. The ombudsman found the modification question was clear, a reasonable consumer would have noticed the modifications and investigated the unusual exhaust branding, and First Central's underwriting criteria would not knowingly cover such vehicles. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the question about modifications was clear and unambiguous. Mr B made a careless misrepresentation by answering 'no' when the car had clearly been modified. A reasonable consumer would have noticed the bodywork modifications by comparison to standard variants and would have been prompted by the unusual exhaust branding to make enquiries or conduct an online search, which would have revealed it was a performance exhaust. Since First Central's underwriting criteria showed it would not knowingly cover such modified vehicles, the misrepresentation was qualifying under CIDRA, entitling First Central to treat the policy as void and decline the claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website