Not upheld: policy avoidance for non-disclosure and claim denial complaint against HDI Global Specialty SE

Decision detail

Summary

C, a limited company, complained that HDI unfairly voided its commercial landlord insurance policy and declined an escape of water claim. HDI voided the 2025 policy because C failed to disclose that the property was being used for holiday lets since January 2025 when the policy renewed. The ombudsman found this non-disclosure was a material circumstance constituting a qualifying breach under the Insurance Act 2015, and HDI had evidence they would not have provided cover if aware of the use. Additionally, the ombudsman concluded that C's expert evidence could not establish the water damage occurred before the May 2025 renewal, supporting HDI's conclusion that damage more likely occurred after renewal. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the Insurance Act 2015, which requires fair presentation of material circumstances. The change of use to holiday lets was material and its non-disclosure constituted a qualifying breach. HDI provided evidence they would not have entered the contract if aware of this use, entitling them to avoid the policy under the Act. Regarding the claim, the ombudsman assessed the available evidence on the balance of probabilities and found C's expert report could not establish a precise start date for the damage, while HDI's conclusion that damage more likely occurred after the May 2025 renewal was reasonable and supported by the evidence.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website