Not upheld: misrepresentation on insurance application and policy avoidance complaint against Ageas Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T purchased a motorcycle and took out an insurance policy with Ageas, stating he was the registered keeper. When the bike was stolen in April 2025, Ageas declined the claim, voiding the policy from inception because Mr T was not the registered keeper—his friend was, as shown on the V5 registration document. Mr T complained that he misunderstood the term and that Ageas should have verified the information. The ombudsman found that Mr T made a careless misrepresentation, the website question with its explanatory note meant he should have known the distinction, and Ageas's underwriting criteria confirmed it would not have offered the policy with the correct information. Therefore, the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Under CIDRA, a consumer must take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation. Mr T's answer that he was the registered keeper was incorrect, as the V5 clearly showed his friend as the registered keeper. The website question with its explanatory note meant Mr T ought reasonably to have known this distinction. The misrepresentation was careless and qualifying because Ageas's underwriting criteria showed it would not have offered the policy if Mr T had correctly stated his friend was the registered keeper. Therefore, Ageas was entitled to void the policy from inception and decline the claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website