Not upheld: Motor insurance, claim handling complaint against Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr D complained that Admiral Insurance failed to properly handle a motor insurance claim, resulting in a County Court Judgement being issued against him in July 2025. Although Admiral accepted fault and took steps to remove the CCJ from his record, paying approximately £600 compensation, Mr D claimed additional financial losses including reduced credit availability and a lower van part-exchange valuation approximately 12 months later. The ombudsman found insufficient evidence that these financial losses resulted directly from Admiral's error, noting that credit impacts were temporary and the van's depreciation was consistent with normal asset aging. The ombudsman upheld Admiral's position that it had already done enough to remedy the situation through prompt acceptance of fault, CCJ settlement, and compensation for distress and inconvenience.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

Although Admiral accepted fault for the CCJ, the ombudsman found insufficient evidence that Mr D's claimed financial losses resulted directly from Admiral's mistake. The credit rating reduction was temporary and returned to original levels. Loss of credit access alone does not constitute quantifiable financial loss without evidence of specific financial harm. The van's reduced part-exchange value could not be attributed solely to Admiral's error, as the vehicle would have naturally depreciated over the 12-month period, accumulated additional mileage, and any replacement van would also have depreciated. The ombudsman concluded Admiral had already taken appropriate remedial action by promptly accepting fault, settling the CCJ, and removing it from Mr D's records, and that the £600 compensation already paid was sufficient to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website