Not upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms A complained about Admiral's handling of her motor insurance claim following a collision in October 2025. Her main concerns were a two-week delay in providing a courtesy car, substandard repairs requiring remedial work, contradictory information about liability, and insufficient weight given to a witness who supported her account. Admiral initially considered accepting full liability but later moved to a 50/50 split position. The ombudsman reviewed CCTV footage and found that the third party's vehicle was positioned ahead of Ms A's car, supporting Admiral's liability assessment. While acknowledging the defective repairs, the ombudsman found Admiral's overall claim handling, liability approach, and £150 compensation to be fair and reasonable, and did not uphold the complaint.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Admiral failed to carry out repairs to a good standard initially, it acted fairly in its overall claim handling. Regarding liability, the ombudsman reviewed the CCTV footage and found that the third party's vehicle was positioned ahead of Ms A's car, making a 50/50 split reasonable given the evidence. The ombudsman noted that Admiral's role is to conduct investigation and settlement on the policyholder's behalf, and that attempting to achieve a 50/50 split rather than accepting full liability was not unreasonable given the evidence and Admiral's experience. The courtesy car was provided in accordance with policy terms. The £150 compensation was deemed fair for the inconvenience caused by defective repairs.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website