Not upheld: claims mishandling; incorrect advice regarding third party contact complaint against UK Insurance Limited trading as Churchill Car Insurance

Decision detail

Summary

Mr B complained that Churchill mishandled his motor insurance claim following a hit-and-run incident in August 2025 by advising him not to contact the third party driver. Churchill recorded the claim as a fault claim when unable to obtain the third party's vehicle registration number. Churchill accepted the incorrect advice and offered £250 compensation. Mr B argued the advice created a window for fraud and that the fault claim status unfairly increased his insurance premiums by over £235. The ombudsman found that the third party was unlikely to have provided vehicle details even if contacted in August 2025, as they refused cooperation on multiple later occasions, and that the fault claim recording reflected standard insurance practice. The complaint was not upheld, and the £250 compensation was deemed fair and reasonable.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Churchill's advice not to contact the third party was incorrect, there was no evidence that the third party would have provided vehicle registration details even if Mr B had contacted them in August 2025. The third party declined to provide details on multiple occasions (10 October, 31 October, and 26 November 2025) and provided inaccurate policy information, suggesting unwillingness to cooperate from the outset. The fault claim recording reflects standard insurance industry practice of treating claims as fault unless recovery is achieved from a liable third party's insurer. Churchill's offer to reopen the claim if evidence emerges during police investigation was considered appropriate. The £250 compensation was deemed fair and reasonable under FOS guidelines for distress and inconvenience.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website