Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Aviva Insurance

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs G claimed for water damage to her property caused by escape of water from her neighbour's property. Her professional representative submitted a schedule of works totalling £14,442.16, but Aviva instructed their own surveyor who found limited damage requiring only partial ceiling and plasterwork replacement, resulting in a cash settlement offer of £2,263 before excess. Mrs G disputed this through her representative, claiming Aviva's scope omitted essential works including full ceiling reinstatement, drying, dust protection, asbestos testing, and electrical checks. The ombudsman found Aviva's approach to obtain independent assessment and make a cash settlement based on their surveyor's findings was fair and reasonable, and that the absence of independent evidence contradicting Aviva's expert findings meant the complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Aviva's approach to obtain independent expert assessment and make a cash settlement based on their surveyor's findings was fair and proportionate. The existence of a competing opinion from Mrs G's representative did not, in itself, make Aviva's offer inherently unfair. The ombudsman was not persuaded by Mrs G's challenges to Aviva's expert's methodology or findings, noting that no independent evidence was provided to contradict the surveyor's conclusions. The ombudsman determined that Aviva's request for detailed breakdown from Mrs G's representative was reasonable given the significant cost difference, and that the refusal to provide such breakdown limited the ability to understand the cost discrepancy. The ombudsman concluded that Aviva's proposed settlement fell within the range of reasonable conclusions to resolve the claim.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website