Not upheld: claim handling error and payment processing failure complaint against Haven Insurance Company Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6279280 of 2026-04-22T00:00:00+00:00. claim handling error and payment processing failure complaint against Haven Insurance Company Limited. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6279280 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-04-22T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Haven Insurance Company Limited |
| Product | motor insurance |
| Claim type | claim handling error and payment processing failure |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | Haven Insurance Company Limited to pay Mr Z £100 compensation, if not already paid. |
Summary
Mr Z complained about Haven's handling of a motor insurance claim following a road traffic accident in September 2025 where his vehicle was declared a total loss. Haven made an error by initially issuing the settlement payment to Mr Z rather than his finance company, and the payment was not reissued to the correct party until approximately 11 days later when Mr Z contacted Haven. Mr Z claimed this error caused financial losses including continued finance payments, credit file damage, and loss of earnings, and sought £3,000 compensation plus refund of his policy excess. The ombudsman found that while Haven's error and poor communication were acknowledged, the impact was relatively short-lived and there was insufficient evidence that Haven's actions caused the claimed financial losses, which appeared to stem from the accident itself rather than the payment delay. The ombudsman upheld Haven's offer of £100 compensation as fair and reasonable.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman acknowledged Haven's error in the settlement payment process but found the impact was relatively short-lived (11 days) and resolved once brought to their attention. The ombudsman was not persuaded by the evidence that Haven's payment error caused the claimed financial losses. The reduction in Mr Z's earnings appeared to result from the accident itself and injuries sustained, occurring immediately after the incident before the payment issue arose. The credit file summary did not demonstrate that Haven's actions caused missed payments or adverse markers. The ombudsman found it reasonable for Mr Z to pay the policy excess as this is standard practice, and that recovery of excess and other losses would normally be pursued from the third party. The ombudsman concluded that the £100 compensation already offered fairly reflected the impact of Haven's service failings.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Haven Insurance Company Limited, all decisions | 401 | 47% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website