Not upheld: claims handling - replacement product suitability and exchange refusal complaint against Domestic & General Insurance Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R claimed on his household warranty insurance for a faulty hob. D&G offered a replacement hob via a link, but the hob Mr R selected was a different size with the gas connection in a different location, making it unsuitable for installation. Although the manufacturer had informed Mr R of the incompatibility before delivery, Mr R did not contact D&G about the problem until five weeks after receiving the hob. D&G refused to exchange it, citing the manufacturer's refusal to accept returns after the time elapsed. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint, finding that while D&G may have erred initially, Mr R's unreasonable delay in reporting the issue prevented rectification and it would be unfair to require D&G to provide another hob.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although D&G may have erred in providing a non-like-for-like replacement hob, the ombudsman found that the reason the hob could not now be rectified was Mr R's five-week delay in reporting the problem to D&G. The ombudsman considered it unfair to require D&G to pay out twice on the claim by providing another hob when the manufacturer would no longer accept the return due to the time elapsed. The ombudsman noted that Mr R had been informed of the installation issue before delivery but did not contact D&G until five weeks later.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website