Car Decision Reference 2023-0071

• Case Outcome: Partially upheld
• Subject Matter: Car
• Reference: 2023-0071
• Date: 27 March 2023
• Finantial Sector: Insurance
• Conducts Complained Of: Rejection of claim,Claim handling delays or issues, Dissatisfaction with customer service , Failure to process instructions

Decision Ref:

2023-0071

Sector:

Insurance

Product / Service:

Car

Conduct(s) complained of:

Rejection of claim

Claim handling delays or issues

Dissatisfaction with customer service

Failure to process instructions

Outcome:

Partially upheld

LEGALLY BINDING DECISION OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AND PENSIONS OMBUDSMAN

This complaint relates to a motor insurance policy. The Complainant is represented by his

son.

The Complainant’s Case

The Complainant says that on 18th November 2020 he was involved in an incident while

driving, which resulted in a collision with a third party’s wall. An Garda Síochána appear to

have attended the scene of the incident, although it is unclear from the submissions whether

they were specifically called to the scene, or came upon the incident.

Sometime after the incident it appears that the property owner contacted the Provider

which rang the Complainant on 18th January 2021. The Complainant says that the Provider

asserts that during this phone call of 18th January 2021, the Complainant admitted liability

for the damage to the wall.

The Complainant’s son obtained a recording of the call dated 18th January 2021 from the

Provider and in his email to the Provider dated 12th April 2021 he submits that at the time

of this conversation his elderly father, who is in his eighties, had difficulty in understanding

the content of the phone call:

“It is clear from the phone call of 18 January that your representative on the call is

fully aware from the start and throughout, that she is speaking to someone who has

serious difficulty understanding what is being discussed. The amount of repetition

- 2 -

/Cont’d…

and calls for clarity indicate that it could not but be so. On no fewer than ten clear

occasions my father told your representative that he could not hear or understand

what was being said.

He frequently asked her to repeat what she had said. Her statements were often met

with long silences that were not broken until she spoke again”

In correspondence with the Provider, the Complainant’s son expresses his concern with the

Provider’s treatment of the Complainant:

“In short, [the Provider has] seriously mistreated an old man – I do not believe they

would have treated a middle-aged customer in this fashion … your treatment of my

father an [8x]-year old man, has been contemptuous and, unless you have reason to

say otherwise, amounts to abuse of the elderly”.

The Complainant’s son also states that, during the course of the call, the Complainant denied

liability for the damage caused during the incident:

“he [the Complainant] clearly states on numerous occasions in the call that he does

not accept responsibility for any damage arising. He literally states at 12 mins 20 secs

that “there was no damage done”.”

The Complainant’s son says that although the Provider states that it wrote to the

Complainant on 19th January 2021, the Complainant never received any correspondence

from the Provider in or around that date.

The Complainant says that on 10th March 2021, the Provider wrote stating:

“[t]he claim has now been closed and we have payments totalling €9,311.13 … you

have accepted that you are fully liable for the incident which gave rise to the claim.

Your No Claims Discount has been affected as a result of this incident”.

The Complainant’s son states that when he listened to a recording of the phone call of 18th

January 2021 between the Provider and the Complainant, there was:

“no reference made to any negative consequences for my father, until the very end –

and then in passing. The words “no claims bonus” are unmentioned … [r]ather, after

14 minutes of trying to listen to a cold-call from a stranger, my hard of hearing father

was told “you won’t lose all your discount – you’ll only lose part of it”.

The Complainant’s son submits that this sentence at the end of a long and very detailed

conversation was all the Complainant was told of the financial consequences for him “of

something he neither agreed nor consented to”.