Not upheld: claim handling - consideration of evidence in theft claim complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr J complained that Admiral Insurance had not fairly considered evidence he provided to support a theft claim for his car stolen in June 2024. Admiral had declined the claim citing a fraud exclusion after investigating concerns about the claim. Following a previous Ombudsman decision upholding Admiral's position in November 2025, Mr J provided a new locksmith report in November 2025. Admiral reviewed this new evidence but maintained its decision to decline the claim. The Ombudsman found that Admiral properly reviewed the new evidence and acted reasonably in not overturning its original decision, as the locksmith report did not prove the claim was valid and only suggested alternative scenarios without supporting evidence.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The Ombudsman found that Admiral properly reviewed the new locksmith report provided by Mr J and acted reasonably in deciding not to overturn its original decision. While Mr J had concerns about the weight given to different evidence, the Ombudsman determined it was not unreasonable for Admiral to assess which evidence carried more weight. The locksmith report provided by Mr J did not prove Admiral's decision was wrong and only set out possible alternative scenarios without evidence that they occurred in Mr J's case. Admiral's decision was based on wider concerns and inconsistencies that had already been investigated and decided upon by the service in the previous complaint.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website