Not upheld: service limitation and policy terms application complaint against ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr J complained to ARAG seeking written legal support to make a section 75 claim against his credit card provider regarding unauthorised treatment costs for his pet. ARAG declined to provide written correspondence support, informing Mr J that its legal advice service was restricted to telephone advice only. Mr J argued that ARAG was mandating a formal legal process while withholding necessary support. The ombudsman found that ARAG acted fairly in relying on the policy terms which explicitly restricted the service to telephone advice only, and that such telephone-based legal helplines are standard industry practice. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that ARAG's policy terms explicitly restricted the legal advice service to telephone advice only, and ARAG acted fairly in relying on this restriction. The ombudsman noted that legal helplines are commonly found in legal expenses insurance policies as a benefit providing general legal advice, and that more dedicated support with legal representation would typically only be confirmed after claim assessment. The ombudsman also noted that legal proceedings should be a last resort and that Mr J still had the section 75 route available to resolve his dispute.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website