Not upheld: service failure, incorrect advice, incorrect premium charging, and administrative errors complaint against Saga Services Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr T complained that Saga failed to give sufficient notice that a non-fault accident would affect his renewal premium, leading him to cancel his policy and take out more expensive cover. Saga initially recorded the claim as fault (later corrected to non-fault), charged an incorrect additional premium of £87.63 (later reduced to £45.52), and an adviser incorrectly assured Mr T his premium wouldn't change. Although the ombudsman found Saga made mistakes and acknowledged poor service in several areas, it determined the £175 compensation already paid, together with refunds and a waived cancellation fee, was fair and reasonable. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman acknowledged Saga made several errors: incorrectly recording the claim as fault, charging an incorrect additional premium, miscalculating the cancellation refund by approximately £40, and providing incorrect reassurance about the renewal premium. However, the ombudsman found that: (1) the timing of the accident coinciding with renewal limited Saga's opportunity to update records before issuing the initial quote; (2) as an intermediary, Saga had no control over underwriting decisions or premium pricing; (3) the requirement to declare incidents regardless of fault is standard industry practice; (4) the £175 compensation already paid, together with refunds and waived cancellation fee, was fair and reasonable; and (5) Mr T's decision to cancel the policy and take out alternative cover was ultimately his own choice, for which Saga could not be held responsible.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website