Not upheld: mis-selling complaint against MotorEasy Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr A purchased a cosmetic damage insurance policy from MotorEasy and later complained that the policy limits were not clearly disclosed before purchase. Upon claiming, he became aware that the policy did not cover damage exceeding 30cm in length or 3mm in depth. The ombudsman reviewed the sales call transcript and audio recording, finding that the agent clearly outlined these specific limits and described the cover as minor cosmetic damage. The ombudsman also found the policy documentation to be clear and consistent with the sales call information. The complaint was not upheld as Mr A was provided sufficient information to make an informed decision.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman reviewed the sales call transcript and audio recording and found that the agent clearly outlined the specific policy limits (30cm length, 3mm depth) and confirmed the cover was for minor cosmetic damage. The ombudsman rejected Mr A's assertion that the limit was downplayed and found it was clearly set out. The policy documentation was also found to be clear and consistent with the information provided during the call.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website