Not upheld: policy cancellation, refund calculation, document access complaint against First Central Underwriting Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained about First Central's cancellation of his car insurance policy taken out on 5 June 2025, claiming unfair treatment because he had previously provided documents for a similar policy. First Central requested validation documents (DVLA check code and proof of address) on 27 June 2025 with a deadline of 11 July 2025, citing variations in his details between applications. After multiple reminders and a cancellation notice, the policy was cancelled on 23 July 2025 when Mr C failed to provide the documents. Mr C also complained about the refund calculation (£65.48 owed), inability to access policy documents on the online portal, and subsequent default notice and debt recovery actions. The ombudsman found First Central's request for revalidation was reasonable, the timeframe was fair despite Mr C's work constraints, the refund calculation was correct under policy terms, and First Central was not aware of any portal access issues as Mr C never reported them. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that First Central's request for validation documents was fair and reasonable because Mr C's details had varied between applications, making revalidation an important factor in assessing risk and pricing. The timeframe given (from 27 June to 23 July 2025) was reasonable despite Mr C's work constraints, with multiple reminders provided through various communication methods. The policy terms clearly permitted cancellation for failure to provide documents. Regarding the refund calculation, the ombudsman found it was properly calculated in accordance with policy terms: the proportional premium for 45 days of cover (£197.11) was fair, the £50 arrangement fee was non-refundable as disclosed, the Excess Protect cover was non-refundable as typical for such policies, and the £50 cancellation fee was reasonable for administrative costs. Regarding portal access, the ombudsman found First Central could not be faulted for not offering alternative document submission methods when Mr C never informed them of the access problem.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website