Not upheld: Card / payment disputes complaint against One Sure Insurance Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained that One Sure Insurance Limited unfairly retained its administration fee and refund processing fee when he cancelled his commercial insurance policy shortly after purchase, claiming he should have been able to cancel within the 14-day cooling-off period without incurring charges. Mr M had discovered that total loss vehicles could not be added to the policy and felt this limitation was not made clear at inception. The ombudsman found that One Sure Insurance Limited acted fairly because it had completed the service it offered (sourcing and arranging the policy based on Mr M's stated needs), the fees were clearly explained at inception and in the terms of business which Mr M accepted, and Mr M had not specified a requirement for total loss vehicle cover during the sales call. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that One Sure Insurance Limited fulfilled its obligations by providing an advised sale based on Mr M's stated needs. Since Mr M did not specify a requirement for total loss vehicle cover, the firm acted fairly in recommending the policy it did. Although the policy was cancelled within the 14-day cooling-off period, the ombudsman determined that a business can charge fees proportionate to the service offered. As One Sure Insurance Limited completed its service of searching the market and arranging the policy as requested, it was entitled to retain its administration fee and refund processing fee in line with the terms of business that Mr M had accepted. The underwriter's charge for time on risk was the responsibility of the underwriter 'T', not One Sure Insurance Limited.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website