Not upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Watford Insurance Company Europe Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Miss H claimed on her motor insurance policy following a frontal impact accident. After initial repairs proved unsatisfactory, she reported additional issues with steering and braking. Watford arranged further inspections and repairs, but declined to cover suspension work based on an independent engineer's finding that the suspension damage was due to wear and tear, not the accident. Miss H disputed this with alternative expert reports, but the ombudsman found Watford had reasonably relied on the independent engineer's professional opinion and that Miss H's evidence did not conclusively prove the suspension issues were accident-related. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman noted that the FOS cannot determine how damage occurred but can assess the information the insurance company relied upon. Watford used an independent engineer's professional opinion concluding suspension damage was not accident-related. The evidence provided by Miss H did not confirm without doubt that the ongoing issues were related to the accident in this claim. The occurrence of a second frontal impact collision after the original repairs further undermined the case for additional inspection.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website