Not upheld: claims handling - delayed repairs and hire car provision complaint against Tesco Underwriting Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr L complained to Tesco Underwriting Limited about poor claims handling following a non-fault motor accident on 17 September 2025. His wing mirror was damaged, and Tesco arranged repairs through firm F and hire through firm A under a credit hire arrangement. Mr L was without transport for seven weeks due to delays in collecting his car and failures in the hire arrangement. When the garage attempted collection on 7 November 2025, it refused to take the car due to serious mechanical issues (oil leak, excess gas emissions, faulty brakes). Tesco offered Mr L a cash in lieu payment of £841.55 or the option to fix the mechanical issues first. The ombudsman found Tesco not responsible for the hire delays (attributable to firm A) or repair delays (caused by the vehicle's unsafe mechanical condition) and did not uphold the complaint, though directing the parties to resolve the outstanding CIL payment.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Tesco was not responsible for the hire car failures because the credit hire arrangement was a separate agreement between Mr L and firm A, outside Tesco's control. Although Tesco's initial explanation about the 7 November inspection was inaccurate, the call recording confirmed the garage agent (not firm F) discovered the mechanical issues. The ombudsman considered a one-month delay to inspect accident damage unreasonable, but found Tesco and firm F were not to blame for the subsequent delays caused by the mechanical issues. The garage's refusal to accept the unsafe vehicle was reasonable, and Tesco's attempts to find alternative garages demonstrated reasonable assistance. The ombudsman noted Mr L could make a separate complaint about the credit hire referral if he believed it was unfair.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website