Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Acromas Insurance Company Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6376264 of 2026-06-29T00:00:00+00:00. Service failures generally complaint against Acromas Insurance Company Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6376264 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-06-29T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | Acromas Insurance Company Limited |
| Product | Motor insurance |
| Claim type | Service failures generally |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | 1. Pay £800 compensation for trouble and upset. 2. Reimburse car hire costs between 25 September 2025 and the date car was repatriated to UK garage. 3. Add simple interest at time-weighted Bank of England base rate plus 1% from date Mr F paid the costs to date of reimbursement. |
Summary
Mr F's car broke down in France on 5 August 2025 whilst on holiday. Acromas agents made broken promises about mechanic availability and taxi provision, forcing Mr F and his family to spend a night in the car. The vehicle was not repaired in France and repatriation was not authorised until 5 September 2025, one month later. Mr F claimed for three periods of car hire but Acromas only paid for the first period. The ombudsman upheld the complaint, requiring Acromas to pay £800 compensation and reimburse car hire costs in England from 25 September until repatriation, plus interest. However, the 11-12 September car hire costs were not upheld because they were incurred due to pet transportation complications, which the policy explicitly excludes.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
Acromas failed to provide the service promised in the policy terms, causing avoidable delays, poor communication, and broken promises. While they cannot be held responsible for French businesses being closed or busy during peak season, they take premiums for that period and customers are entitled to expect service delivery. The vehicle breakdown itself was not Acromas' fault, but their failures significantly increased the distress and inconvenience. However, the policy explicitly excludes cover for additional travel costs due to pet transportation requirements, which was the reason for the extended stay and 11-12 September car hire costs. The car hire in England was only necessary due to avoidable delays in repatriation authorisation, so Acromas should cover those costs despite no policy cover existing. Compensation of £800 is fair for substantial and serious distress over a sustained period.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| Acromas Insurance Company Limited, all decisions | 862 | 30% |
| Service failures generally, all decisions | 34,193 | 32% |
| Motor insurance, all decisions | 24,103 | 35% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website