Not upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against AXA Insurance UK Plc

Decision detail

Summary

Mr M complained about AXA's handling of a third-party claim following a collision at a petrol station where he was reversing into a bay. AXA assessed Mr M as likely to be held at fault because he was the reversing party and settled the claim on a without prejudice basis to avoid legal costs. Mr M disputed this, arguing the third party admitted liability at the scene and that damage patterns suggested the third party drove across his car, and he referenced a witness and CCTV footage. The ombudsman found AXA's liability assessment fair and reasonable based on the Highway Code principle that reversing drivers bear a higher duty of care, and concluded that even with the additional evidence Mr M mentioned, it would be unlikely to overcome this established principle. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that AXA's liability assessment was fair and reasonable based on the principle that the reversing party bears a higher duty of care under the Highway Code and common law. While Mr M disputed liability and mentioned potential evidence (witness, CCTV), the ombudsman concluded that even with such evidence, it would be unlikely to overcome the significant weight attached to the reversing driver's responsibility. The ombudsman also found that AXA's decision to settle without prejudice was appropriate to avoid unnecessary legal costs and was in line with policy terms, leaving Mr M the option to pursue a private claim if he wished.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website