Upheld: Motor insurance, total loss valuation complaint against esure Insurance Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6335550 of 2026-06-24T00:00:00+00:00. Motor insurance, total loss valuation complaint against esure Insurance Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6335550 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-24T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | esure Insurance Limited |
| Product | Motor insurance |
| Claim type | Motor insurance, total loss valuation |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | esure Insurance Limited must: (1) settle Mr D's total loss claim based on a valuation of £5,890; (2) pay the difference between £5,890 and the previous valuation of £4,760; (3) pay simple interest calculated using the time-weighted average of the Bank of England base rate plus one percentage point from 12 November 2025 (date of first interim payment) to settlement; (4) make payment within 28 calendar days of notification of Mr D's acceptance; (5) if payment is not made by the deadline, pay 8% simple interest per year on the outstanding amount from the deadline date to settlement. |
Summary
Mr D complained about esure's valuation of his car as a total loss following a road traffic accident in October 2025. esure valued the car at £4,760 by averaging two of four available valuation guides (£4,891 and £4,628) and deducting £102 for pre-existing damage. Mr D disputed this valuation as too low. The FOS upheld the complaint, finding that esure's selective use of only two guides was not fair and reasonable, particularly when the highest guide valuation of £5,890 had no evidence of error and was independently confirmed by the FOS investigator. The ombudsman ordered esure to settle the claim at £5,890 plus interest, finding this represented a fair market value based on the available valuation guide evidence.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that esure's approach of averaging only two of the four valuation guides was not fair and reasonable. The highest valuation of £5,890 should not be discounted as an outlier without evidence of error, and the FOS investigator independently obtained the same figure. The adverts provided by esure were not persuasive as they related to cars with significantly lower mileage and higher prices. In the absence of other persuasive evidence supporting esure's lower valuation, the highest guide valuation of £5,890 represents a fair market value. The £102 deduction for pre-existing damage was considered fair as it represented 25% of the estimated repair costs.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| esure Insurance Limited, all decisions | 1,892 | 41% |
| Motor insurance, total loss valuation, all decisions | 3,483 | 35% |
| Motor insurance, all decisions | 24,103 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website