Upheld: Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited
Financial Ombudsman decision DRN-6461936 of 2026-07-03T00:00:00+00:00. Travel / life insurance claim disputes complaint against ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited. Outcome: Upheld.
Decision detail
| Reference | DRN-6461936 |
|---|---|
| Decision date | 2026-07-03T00:00:00+00:00 |
| Firm | ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited |
| Product | Other regulated product |
| Claim type | Travel / life insurance claim disputes |
| Outcome | Upheld |
| Remedy | ARAG must reconsider the clinical negligence claim relating to anal fissure(s) to assess whether it meets the policy requirements. ARAG must pay Mr H £200 compensation for service failures and inconvenience caused by not considering this aspect of the claim further. |
Summary
Mr H claimed on a legal expenses insurance policy for assistance with a clinical negligence claim relating to alleged negligent treatment of prostatitis and resulting conditions. ARAG declined the claim, citing that part of the alleged negligence occurred before the policy was taken out and that exclusions for diagnostic failures applied. The ombudsman found that while most of the claim flows from events before the policy start date (April 2022) and therefore lacks coverage, ARAG should have separately considered the claim relating to anal fissures allegedly caused by the failure to refer for pelvic health physical therapy, as this represented an intervening act. The ombudsman upheld the complaint and directed ARAG to reconsider the anal fissure aspect of the claim and pay £200 compensation for service failures.
The Ombudsman's reasoning
The ombudsman found that most of Mr H's claim flows from the initial event in April 2022 (before the policy started on 6 October 2022) and therefore falls outside coverage. However, the alleged negligence regarding the failure to refer for pelvic health physical therapy, which allegedly caused the anal fissures, was identified as a separate intervening act that does not foreseeably flow from the first event. This aspect should be reconsidered by ARAG to determine if it meets the remaining policy terms and conditions. The ombudsman also found ARAG failed to deal with some communications within service standards.
How this compares
| Group | Decisions | Uphold rate |
|---|---|---|
| ARAG Legal Expenses Insurance Company Limited, all decisions | 105 | 26% |
| Travel / life insurance claim disputes, all decisions | 21,318 | 31% |
| Other regulated product, all decisions | 51,462 | 30% |
Source
Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website