Not upheld: unfair claim decline complaint against Intact Insurance UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr K complained that Intact Insurance unfairly declined his legal expenses insurance claim relating to a boundary dispute over a piece of land. The land had a separate Land Registry title number from his principal home, although it was purchased together with the property in 2018 and was intended as a garden extension. Intact declined the claim as not covered by the policy terms, which limit coverage to the principal home and exclude other land. The ombudsman upheld Intact's decision, finding that the ordinary meaning of 'principal home' does not extend to a separate piece of land with its own title deed, regardless of its proximity or intended use.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the ordinary meaning of 'principal home' to refer to the property Mr K lives in, including the garden, but not to a separate piece of land even if adjacent to it. Since the disputed land has a separate title deed to Mr K's home, it constitutes a separate piece of land and falls outside the policy's coverage for the principal home. Therefore, Intact's decision to decline the claim was reasonable and in line with the policy terms.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website