Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Vitality Corporate Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr R held a life insurance policy with Vitality since 2013 with an optional rewards programme. In September 2022, anticipating a job change where his new employer would offer the same Vitality rewards programme, Mr R cancelled the rewards element to avoid paying twice. When he attempted to reinstate the rewards in June 2023 after changing employment, Vitality informed him this was not possible as the programme was no longer available as a standalone product. Mr R complained that he had been led to believe he could pause and reinstate the rewards. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding that while Vitality advisors did not explicitly promise reinstatement was possible, they failed to clearly explain the permanent consequences of cancellation. Vitality was ordered to pay £200 compensation but not required to reinstate the rewards programme.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that while Mr R believed he could pause and reinstate the rewards programme, the evidence from the phone call recordings did not support that he was explicitly told this by Vitality advisors. The advisors' understanding of Mr R's intentions—to avoid paying twice for the same rewards—was reasonable based on the conversation content. However, Vitality failed to provide sufficiently clear information about the permanent consequences of cancelling the rewards programme, which would have caused avoidable uncertainty and inconvenience. The ombudsman rejected the requirement to reinstate the rewards programme on the original terms because: (1) no explicit promise was made that reinstatement was possible, (2) the rewards programme is no longer available as a standalone product, and (3) Mr R's stated intention to retain the option to reinstate was not made entirely clear during the conversation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website