Not upheld: Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against Covea Insurance Plc

Decision detail

Summary

L, a limited company, claimed against its Covea retail and salons insurance policy for roof damage in December 2025. Covea avoided the policy and declined the claim, finding that L had breached its duty to make a fair presentation of risk by declaring the roof as 'standard construction' when it was primarily made of asbestos. The Statement of Fact explicitly defined 'standard construction' as roofed only with slate, tile or concrete. L disputed the avoidance, arguing it had not been specifically asked about asbestos and that avoidance was disproportionate. The ombudsman upheld Covea's decision, finding L knew or ought to have known the roof was asbestos and that Covea would have declined cover if properly informed, which under the Insurance Act 2015 permits policy avoidance.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that L breached its duty under the Insurance Act 2015 to make a fair presentation of risk by failing to disclose that the roof was made of asbestos rather than the materials specified in the definition of 'standard construction' (slate, tile or concrete). The Statement of Fact clearly set out this definition, and L knew or ought to have known the roof was primarily asbestos. Crucially, Covea provided evidence that it would have declined cover entirely if the asbestos had been disclosed, which under the Act allows Covea to avoid the policy. The ombudsman also found no unreasonable delay in Covea's decision-making and rejected claims for repair costs and compensation.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website