Not upheld: claims handling - dispute over causation of fault and responsibility for repairs complaint against Tesco Underwriting Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mrs H claimed that parking sensors on her car stopped working after Tesco's approved repairer completed repairs following a non-fault accident. Tesco refused to carry out further repairs, relying on a main dealer's diagnostic report concluding the fault was software-related. Mrs H provided a local dealer's report suggesting the fault could be accident-related. The ombudsman found Tesco's decision reasonable because the main dealer's expert report contradicted Mrs H's claim, the local dealer's report identified a different fault than originally reported, and the local dealer could not explain the causal link to the accident. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the balance of probabilities test to determine whether Tesco fairly considered the available evidence. The ombudsman found that Tesco's reliance on its repairer's assessment and the main dealer's independent report (identifying a software issue) was reasonable. The ombudsman found the local dealer's report less persuasive because it identified a different fault (side sensors rather than front sensors as originally reported), provided no explanation for how it was related to the accident, and the dealer admitted being unaware of the accident damage location. The ombudsman placed greater weight on the main dealer's specialist expertise in the car's make.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website