Not upheld: claims handling delays and unfair claim denial complaint against Inter Partner Assistance SA (IPA)
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6270452 of 2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00. claims handling delays and unfair claim denial complaint against Inter Partner Assistance SA (IPA). Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6270452 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-21T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Inter Partner Assistance SA (IPA) |
| Product | travel insurance |
| Claim type | claims handling delays and unfair claim denial |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | None. IPA is not required to do anything further. The £50 compensation already paid is deemed fair and reasonable. |
Summary
Mr M claimed on a travel insurance policy after suffering a leg fracture requiring surgery while abroad in August 2025. IPA declined his personal accident claim in November 2025, finding the injury did not meet the policy definition requiring death, loss of limb, loss of sight, or permanent total disablement within 12 months. IPA paid £50 compensation for delays in handling the claim. Mr M complained that IPA should have directed him to make a medical expenses claim and that the compensation was inadequate. The ombudsman found IPA's decision to decline the personal accident claim was reasonable based on the medical evidence and policy terms, and that the £50 compensation was fair for the claims handling delays.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that IPA's policy terms clearly required that personal accident benefit only be payable if the accident resulted in death, loss of sight or limb, or permanent total disablement within 12 months. The medical evidence showed Mr M's leg required surgery but did not evidence limb loss, and 12 months had not elapsed to assess permanent total disablement. IPA's conclusion that the claim did not meet policy terms was reasonable. Regarding claims handling, while IPA caused delays between 1 September and 12 November 2025, the £50 compensation was fair and proportionate because ultimately the claim was not payable and Mr M was not denied access to money he was entitled to.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Inter Partner Assistance SA (IPA), all decisions | 11 | 4% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website