Upheld: Service failures generally complaint against Homeserve Membership Limited

Decision detail

Summary

Mr S complained that Homeserve sent his large print policy documents in an envelope marked 'Articles for the Blind', which he felt disclosed his vulnerability to others. Homeserve claimed the marking was a Royal Mail requirement for alternative format documents. The ombudsman found that Mr S was not blind and did not meet Royal Mail's scheme criteria, which only applies to registered blind or visually impaired customers. Since the marking served no legitimate purpose for Mr S and could expose him to vulnerability once the envelope left Homeserve's control, the complaint was upheld. Homeserve was ordered to pay £100 compensation.

The Ombudsman's reasoning

The ombudsman found that Homeserve had not demonstrated it was reasonable to add the 'Articles for the Blind' wording to the envelope. Mr S was not blind and had not claimed to be blind; he had simply requested larger font documents. The Royal Mail scheme only requires this marking where customers meet specific criteria and wish to access free postage. There was no evidence Mr S met these criteria or that Homeserve needed to use the scheme. Once the envelope left Homeserve's control, it could not prevent others from seeing the marking on an envelope containing Mr S's name and address. This created a potential vulnerability concern for Mr S with no clear purpose or necessity relevant to him. The ombudsman considered this unfair treatment that caused Mr S anxiety.

How this compares

Source

Read the original decision on the Financial Ombudsman Service website