Not upheld: claim handling - subsidence claim scope, cash settlement adequacy, alternative accommodation complaint against Aviva Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr and Mrs P claimed for subsidence damage to their property in 2020. After investigation, monitoring, and confirmation of no further movement in 2023, Aviva scoped repair works and offered a cash settlement of approximately £19,800. Mr and Mrs P disputed the settlement amount, the scope of works (particularly regarding kitchen units and roof damage), and Aviva's handling of complaints about their contractor. They also sought compensation for declining alternative accommodation. The ombudsman found Aviva's approach was fair and reasonable under the policy terms, with no expert evidence provided by Mr and Mrs P to challenge Aviva's professional assessments. The only remedy upheld was the £750 compensation already offered for delays and poor communication.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Aviva acted fairly in relying on professional contractors to scope the repair work and assess damage causation. Without expert evidence from Mr and Mrs P to challenge Aviva's contractors' conclusions, the ombudsman could not reasonably say the scope was insufficient. The cash settlement reflected what it would cost Aviva to complete the work, which is fair under the policy terms. Mr and Mrs P's decision to decline alternative accommodation did not entitle them to additional compensation for inconvenience. The £750 compensation for delays and poor communication was reasonable given the extended timeline and admitted communication failures.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website