Upheld: fee dispute and service quality complaint complaint against ALLPROPERTYCLAIMS LIMITED

Decision detail

Summary

Mr Z engaged APC to assist with a home insurance claim in November 2024 but terminated the contract in February 2025, dissatisfied with the handling. APC invoiced £10,775.75 for 34.4 hours of work and contractor costs of approximately £5,000. After FOS involvement, APC offered to reduce the fee to £2,500, but Mr Z disputed this and wanted a drying certificate before paying. The ombudsman found APC's timeline and communications adequate, rejected Mr Z's claims of significant delays, and held APC not responsible for the lack of a drying certificate since Mr Z prevented contractors from taking final moisture readings. The ombudsman upheld the complaint by directing APC to accept the £2,500 fee offer and provide a certificate upon payment, finding this represented a fair reduction from the contractually entitled amount.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that APC's terms of business entitled it to charge fees for work carried out even though settlement had not been agreed. The ombudsman calculated that APC was entitled to charge £10,775.75 based on 34.4 hours at £140/hour plus contractor costs of £4,996.55. The ombudsman rejected Mr Z's claims of significant delays or communication gaps, finding the timeline and communications adequate. The ombudsman held APC not responsible for the lack of a drying certificate since Mr Z himself prevented the contractors from taking final moisture readings before removing equipment. The ombudsman found APC's offer to reduce the fee to £2,500 (less than a quarter of the entitled amount) to be reasonable and fair.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website