Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Intact Insurance UK Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Ms B and Mr B complained to Intact Insurance about the handling of a water damage claim made on 14 March 2025 following an escape of water in their flat. Intact declined the claim on around 11 April 2025 because the costs fell below the policy excess. Ms B complained that Intact caused avoidable delays, gave the impression the claim would be settled, and requested excessive and duplicate information. The ombudsman did not uphold the complaint, finding that Intact determined the claim within a reasonable four-week timeframe, made no promises of settlement, and did not request excessive or duplicate information. The ombudsman concluded that further information requests were justified given the apparently high costs and that Intact did not unduly prolong Ms B's difficult living conditions.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Intact determined the claim within a reasonable four-week timeframe given the involvement of multiple parties and apparently excessive costs requiring validation. The ombudsman could not identify any promises of settlement made to Ms B, nor could they find evidence of excessive or duplicate information requests. The ombudsman noted that further information requests during the claim process were a reasonable part of claim validation and that Ms B should have understood this. The ombudsman concluded that Intact did not cause the water escape and therefore could not have unduly prolonged Ms B's difficult living conditions.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website