Not upheld: warranty claim decline - policy exclusion interpretation complaint against Motors Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr P claimed under his extended car warranty for water damage to a window and a loose door rubber seal that occurred during a car wash. Motors declined the claim citing a policy exclusion for body seals. Mr P argued that the seals in his car were complex components specific to his car's unique design, not basic rubber seals. The ombudsman found that Motors acted fairly and reasonably in relying on the explicit policy exclusion for body seals, as the technician had identified the rubber seal failure as the cause of the damage. The complaint was not upheld and no remedy was ordered.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Motors acted fairly and reasonably in relying on the policy exclusion for body seals. Although the ombudsman recognised Mr P's argument about the unique specification of his car, the policy explicitly excluded cover for body seals, and the technician had identified the rubber seal failure as the cause of the damage. The ombudsman also reviewed the consequential failure terms but found no persuasive evidence that the claim should succeed under those terms, as they also excluded cover for damage to body seals.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website