Not upheld: Home insurance claim disputes complaint against Inter Partner Assistance SA (IPA)

Decision detail

Summary

Miss B claimed on her travel insurance policy after personal belongings were stolen from a locked rental vehicle boot while parked between 6pm and 11am. IPA declined the claim citing a policy exclusion for theft from unattended vehicles and Miss B's failure to take reasonable precautions. The ombudsman found the exclusion is clear and unambiguous, and Miss B could not provide evidence the theft occurred during a potentially covered time window (6pm-9pm or 9am-11am), so on balance of probabilities it likely occurred during the excluded overnight period (9pm-9am). The ombudsman also found Miss B recognised the risk but took it anyway, breaching the reasonable precautions requirement. The complaint was not upheld.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman applied the regulatory requirement that insurers must handle claims fairly and not unreasonably reject claims. The policy exclusion for theft from unattended vehicles is clear and unambiguous, and is a common market exclusion. The burden of proof lies with the policyholder to demonstrate a valid claim. Miss B could not provide evidence that the theft occurred between 6pm-9pm or 9am-11am (the only times potentially covered), so on the balance of probabilities it is more likely the theft occurred during the excluded 9pm-9am period. Additionally, Miss B recognised the risk of leaving belongings in an unattended vehicle but took that risk anyway, failing to meet the reasonable precautions requirement. The ombudsman found IPA's claim handling delays were not unreasonable, and the £25 compensation for service failures was fair.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website