Upheld: mis-selling - failure to clearly communicate policy exclusions complaint against Eversure Limited (trading as cover4rentals)

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M purchased a 12-month car hire excess insurance policy from Eversure Limited and subsequently rented a pickup truck while on holiday. When the rental company identified windscreen damage, Mr M's claim was rejected because pickup trucks were excluded from cover. Eversure had refunded the premium but Mr M remained dissatisfied. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, finding that Eversure failed to clearly communicate the vehicle exclusion, which was only visible by clicking a link on the declaration page and was absent from the product information document. The ombudsman ordered Eversure to pay £40.98 to compensate for the declined claim, rejecting Mr M's request for additional compensation for the unused portion of the 12-month policy.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although Eversure sold the policy on a non-advised basis, it was still required to communicate information clearly, fairly and not misleadingly. The wording on the declaration page suggested the vehicle would be covered, while the exclusion was only visible after clicking a link. The exclusion's absence from the IPID further demonstrates it was not sufficiently highlighted. If Eversure had provided clearer information, Mr M would likely have taken out a different policy that met his needs.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website