Not upheld: claim refusal - insufficient proof of purchase and honesty concerns complaint against UK Insurance Limited trading as Direct Line

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S claimed for the theft of his car valued at approximately £15,250 on his motor insurance policy with UKI. UKI refused the claim, citing concerns that Mr S had not provided adequate proof of purchase and had not answered its questions honestly, particularly regarding whether he knew the seller and how he obtained the £9,700 cash payment component of the purchase price. The ombudsman upheld UKI's refusal as reasonable, finding Mr S's evidence of the cash payment was not compelling and his account was vague. However, the ombudsman awarded £100 compensation for UKI's poor service in repeatedly breaking callback promises to Mr S over several months.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that UKI had legitimate concerns about Mr S's proof of purchase, particularly the lack of evidence for the £9,700 cash payment and the vague account of how it was paid. The ombudsman also found UKI's concerns about whether Mr S honestly answered questions regarding his knowledge of the seller were legitimate, as proof of genuine ownership and honesty are necessary to validate a theft claim. However, the ombudsman acknowledged that UKI's service was deficient in regularly breaking callback promises to Mr S over several months, warranting compensation for distress and inconvenience.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website