Not upheld: poor claims handling, avoidable delays, mismanagement of subsidence claim complaint against AXA Insurance Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6352911 of 2026-05-29T00:00:00+00:00. poor claims handling, avoidable delays, mismanagement of subsidence claim complaint against AXA Insurance Plc. Outcome: Not upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6352911 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-29T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | AXA Insurance Plc |
| Product | buildings insurance |
| Claim type | poor claims handling, avoidable delays, mismanagement of subsidence claim |
| Outcome | Not upheld |
| Remedy | AXA's offered compensation of £1,775 was accepted as appropriate. No additional remedy was ordered. The ombudsman noted that AXA should consider alternative accommodation if the property becomes uninhabitable, in line with policy terms and Miss E and Mr Y's individual circumstances. |
Summary
Miss E and Mr Y claimed for subsidence damage in 2020. AXA's scope of work incorrectly excluded render cracks on the front elevation, which AXA initially attributed to thermal movement rather than subsidence. After nearly two years and Miss E and Mr Y providing their own expert report, AXA acknowledged the error. AXA offered £1,775 compensation for poor handling, which Miss E and Mr Y rejected, seeking additional compensation for distress, property value loss, and alternative accommodation. The ombudsman found AXA's service was poor and caused avoidable delays and distress, but determined the offered compensation was fair and reasonable, declining to award further amounts or intervene in ongoing claims management.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman acknowledged that AXA's handling was poor and caused sustained distress and disruption, particularly the two-year delay in resolving the front elevation render issue. However, the ombudsman found that the £1,775 compensation offered was reasonable and in line with what the service would recommend for such failings. The ombudsman declined to award additional compensation for medical costs (lacking evidence of direct causation), property value loss (as AXA is funding repairs rather than making a cash settlement), or to act as a claims handler for ongoing issues.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| AXA Insurance Plc, all decisions | 12 | 46% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website