Not upheld: unreasonable disposal of customer property without authority complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6238205 of 2026-06-02T00:00:00+00:00. unreasonable disposal of customer property without authority complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6238205 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-02T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited |
| Product | motor insurance |
| Claim type | unreasonable disposal of customer property without authority |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | No further action required. Admiral's £350 compensation payment stands. |
Summary
Mr M complained that Admiral Insurance unreasonably disposed of his car's salvage following a total loss claim, despite his September 2025 instruction not to do so. Admiral acknowledged the error, apologised, and paid £350 compensation, but Mr M sought further redress through the FOS. The ombudsman found that while Admiral's disposal of Mr M's property without authority was clearly an error, Mr M suffered no financial loss because the settlement amount equalled the pre-accident market value and any salvage value would have been deducted from the claim. The ombudsman upheld the £350 compensation as reasonable for the non-financial impact of the mistake and declined to order further action.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
While Admiral clearly made an error in disposing of the salvage against Mr M's explicit instruction, the ombudsman found no financial loss resulted because Admiral had paid the full pre-accident market value, which was equivalent to what Mr M could have obtained by selling the salvage or repairing the car. The ombudsman acknowledged the distress caused by the loss of choice and sentimental value but considered the £350 compensation reasonable for the non-financial impact, being in line with similar cases.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited, all decisions | 1,925 | 44% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website