Upheld: claim handling failure and service failure complaint against Domestic & General Insurance Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6352119 of 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00. claim handling failure and service failure complaint against Domestic & General Insurance Plc. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6352119 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-28T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Domestic & General Insurance Plc |
| Product | household warranty insurance |
| Claim type | claim handling failure and service failure |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | D&G must replace the washing machine under the terms and conditions of the policy and pay Ms B £200 compensation for distress and inconvenience caused by continued deprivation of use of the machine and need to use a launderette |
Summary
Ms B claimed on her household warranty policy in January 2026 for a washing machine with smell and staining issues. D&G replaced parts including the drum in February 2026, but days later Ms B reported new issues of ripping clothes and loud banging. Multiple engineer visits produced conflicting findings, with only one identifying a non-repairable gap between drum and seal, which D&G attributed to overloading. The ombudsman found the issues were more likely caused by the repairs themselves since they only appeared after the work was completed and would have been evident before if caused by long-term overloading. D&G was directed to replace the machine under policy terms and pay £200 compensation.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that the issues reported by Ms B (ripping clothes and loud banging) only emerged after the drum replacement in February 2026, not before. If the gap between drum and seal had been caused by years of overloading as D&G claimed, it would have been present in January 2026 and identified during initial inspections. The timing of the issues appearing within days of repairs, combined with the engineer's confirmation that the issue cannot be repaired, indicates the problems were caused by the repairs themselves rather than Ms B's misuse. D&G's own offer to replace the machine and the engineer's finding that the issue is not repairable support proceeding with replacement under the policy terms.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Domestic & General Insurance Plc, all decisions | 657 | 31% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website