Not upheld: service failure - inadequate replacement vehicle provision complaint against UK Insurance Limited (UKI)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr H complained about UK Insurance Limited's failure to provide a suitable replacement car that met his mobility needs while his vehicle was being repaired following an accident. He had to contact UKI multiple times before being offered alternatives, and the car eventually provided was unsuitable due to its height affecting his access and comfort. Although UKI acknowledged it should have offered a replacement sooner and paid £100 compensation, Mr H believed this was insufficient given the 11-day period without suitable transport and the impact on his health and daily life. The ombudsman found that UKI's policy terms did not guarantee an identical replacement car, only one in the same class subject to availability, and that the £100 compensation was fair and reasonable for the service failures.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman considered whether UKI acted in line with policy terms and fairly and reasonably. The policy stated UKI would 'do our best' to provide a replacement vehicle, not an identical one, and subject to availability. The ombudsman found that Mr H was not promised a like-for-like car in the initial call, but rather a car 'something like his own'. While acknowledging Mr H's stress and inconvenience from being without a suitable car for 11 days and having to make repeated calls, the ombudsman determined that UKI acted fairly by providing a replacement car within the same class and that £100 compensation was appropriate under FOS guidance for the impact of the errors.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website