Not upheld: unfair liability decision in motor insurance claim complaint against UK Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss K complained about UKI's handling of her motor insurance claim following a motorway accident where liability was disputed. Both Miss K and the third party blamed each other, with Miss K claiming the third party hit her rear while she was merging lanes, and the third party claiming he was established in his lane when Miss K hit him. UKI settled the claim on a 50/50 split liability basis. The ombudsman found that with two conflicting accounts and no independent evidence, dashcam footage, or witnesses, the damage pattern to both vehicles was consistent with a lane-change collision but not conclusive as to fault. The ombudsman upheld UKI's decision as reasonable and fair, noting that 50/50 split liability is common in such circumstances and was agreed to by the third party's insurer.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that UKI faced two conflicting versions of events with no independent evidence to support either party. The damage pattern to both vehicles was consistent with a lane-change collision but was not conclusive as to which driver was at fault. The ombudsman noted that in such circumstances, it is common practice for liability to be decided on a 50/50 basis, a position supported by the third party's insurer. Given the lack of conclusive evidence, the ombudsman determined that UKI's decision to settle on a 50/50 split liability basis was reasonable and fair.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website