Not upheld: claims settlement decision - liability assessment complaint against Watford Insurance Company Europe Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr C complained about Watford's decision to settle his motor insurance claim on a 50/50 split liability basis following an accident where his car was hit by an undertaking motorcycle. Mr C believed the third party was solely responsible, supported by a witness statement. Watford's solicitors reviewed all evidence including the witness statement, scene images, and relevant case law (Fagan v Jeffers 2005), concluding that a court would likely decide the matter on a 50/50 basis given Mr C's responsibility as a driver turning across traffic and the third party's breach of the Highway Code in undertaking. The ombudsman upheld Watford's decision as reasonable and fair, finding it appropriate not to pursue a claim without reasonable prospects of success.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman considered whether Watford acted fairly and reasonably in settling the claim on a 50/50 basis. While Mr C believed the third party was solely responsible, the solicitors' assessment based on relevant case law, evidence, and Highway Code provisions indicated that a court would likely decide the matter on a 50/50 split basis. Mr C, as the driver turning across traffic, had greater responsibility to ensure the manoeuvre was safe, while the third party was also partly to blame for undertaking. The ombudsman found it reasonable for Watford not to pursue a claim it did not have reasonable prospects of winning, as this would only add costs.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website