Partially upheld: mis-information about policy cover / failure to disclose exclusions complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6377283 of 2026-05-22T00:00:00+00:00. mis-information about policy cover / failure to disclose exclusions complaint against HSBC UK Bank Plc. Outcome: Partially upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6377283 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-05-22T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | HSBC UK Bank Plc |
| Product | travel insurance |
| Claim type | mis-information about policy cover / failure to disclose exclusions |
| Outcome | Partially upheld |
| Remedy | HSBC UK Bank Plc directed to pay Mr S £300 total compensation for distress and inconvenience caused (inclusive of the £100 already offered). Payment must be made within 28 days of Mr S accepting the decision, with interest at 8% simple per annum if paid later. |
Summary
Mr S complained to HSBC about information provided regarding travel insurance cover for his bike (valued at £4,000) prior to a trip abroad. HSBC's advisor confirmed property would be insured but did not disclose that pedal cycles were excluded, and advised Mr S to contact the insurer directly due to the £2,500 personal belongings limit. Mr S said he would call the insurer but did not do so before travelling. After an accident abroad, the insurer declined his claim for bike repair (£1,830) citing the pedal cycle exclusion. The ombudsman upheld the complaint in part, finding HSBC should have disclosed the exclusion but concluding it was unfair to award the full financial loss given Mr S was aware of coverage limitations and failed to follow the advisor's recommendation to contact the insurer. HSBC was ordered to pay £300 compensation for distress and inconvenience.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that while HSBC failed to inform Mr S that pedal cycles were excluded from cover, Mr S was made aware during the call that there were limitations to his cover (the £2,500 limit for personal belongings). Critically, HSBC's advisor explicitly advised Mr S to speak with the insurer directly and Mr S confirmed he would do so, but he failed to make that call before travelling. The ombudsman concluded it would be unfair to hold HSBC responsible for the full financial loss when Mr S was aware of coverage limitations and had the opportunity to clarify cover with the insurer but chose not to. However, compensation was awarded for the loss of expectation caused by HSBC's failure to mention the pedal cycle exclusion.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| HSBC UK Bank Plc, all decisions | 7,532 | 23% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website