Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs J claimed for 99 items of stolen jewellery following a burglary in March 2025 under their contents insurance policy with Admiral. Admiral declined the claim for 90 items, citing insufficient substantiation and lack of evidence of ownership, accepting only 9 items. The ombudsman found Admiral's enquiries for supporting documentation were reasonable and in line with policy terms, and agreed that insufficient evidence existed to prove ownership for the majority of items at the time of the final response. The ombudsman declined to consider further evidence provided after the investigator's assessment as it fell outside the scope of the original complaint. The complaint was not upheld, and the £300 compensation for claim handling delays was deemed fair.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that the burden of proof initially rests with the policyholder to reasonably show they have suffered an insured loss. Admiral's enquiries for supporting documentation were reasonable and in line with policy terms. At the point of referral to the FOS, there was insufficient evidence to prove ownership and substantiate the claim for the majority of items. The £300 compensation for delays was fair given the circumstances. The ombudsman declined to consider evidence provided after the final response letter as it fell outside the scope of the original complaint and would require Admiral to have a fresh opportunity to respond.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website