Not upheld: claim handling - repatriation decision and garage selection complaint against Astrenska Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M's car broke down in Europe and was taken to a local garage by Astrenska. After an initial repair estimate of €4,297.22, the garage identified further damage and increased the estimate to €6,697.22. Mr M requested repatriation instead, but Astrenska declined based on the vehicle's current market value (£1,505.28) being lower than repatriation costs (approximately £2,880). Mr M subsequently arranged his own repatriation for £1,800 and repairs for £4,330, arguing Astrenska should have considered cheaper UK repair options. The ombudsman upheld Astrenska's decision, finding it complied with policy terms requiring assessment based on repair costs from the nearest suitable workshop, and that the garage was an independent third party for which Astrenska bore no responsibility.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Astrenska acted in accordance with its policy obligations. The policy permits Astrenska to decline repatriation where the cost exceeds the current market value of the vehicle, calculated using repair estimates from the nearest suitable workshop. Although Mr M later obtained cheaper repatriation and repair quotes, Astrenska was entitled to rely on the garage's estimate at the time of its decision. The policy specifically requires repair costs 'from a suitable workshop nearest to the breakdown', not from potential UK alternatives. The garage was an independent third party, not Astrenska's agent, so Astrenska was not responsible for the garage's delays, inflated estimates, or charges for storage and diagnostics.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website