Financial Ombusman releases 21 significant findings

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
39,590
Financial Services Ombudsman, Joe Meade, today on his website (PDF)
gives details of 21 significant findings made in the insurance area in the July/November 2008 period - 11 were upheld and the other 10 rejected. Findings in the banking and other credit institutions area will be published in January 2009.

(Mod's note: I have moved the findings on investments to the investments forum)

Upheld
€325,000 specified illness cover directed to be paid and application of Insurance Company’s ‘loss of independence’ test criticized

Reduction from 50% to 20% in no claims bonus for minor car damage caused by a 70 year old was too harsh; reduced to 5% for one year only

· Reduction from 50% to 20% in no claims bonus for minor car damage caused by a 70 year old was too harsh; reduced to 5% for one year only
· Sale of €20,000 assurance policy did not meet sale guidelines- €5,000 award
· Permanent Health Insurance benefit confusion resolved and €91,000 arrears paid
·
· Personal Accident Benefit definition was not clear - 50% benefit to be paid
· Travel Insurance
o Definition of ‘relative’ / ‘step-parent’; Ombudsman directs 75% refund of €1,100 claim
o Cancellation of holiday due to pre-existing illness merits 50% award of Stg£1,500
Not upheld

· Provider was entitled to alter inpatient only medical insurance cover
· Medical Expenses Insurance and Pre-Existing Condition Waiting Period
  • Other private car insurance cover did not extend to commercial vehicles
  • Travel insurance
    • Loss of money and valuables while mugged on holidays
    • Lost baggage complaint and delayed baggage issue
 

NorthDrum

Frequent Poster
Messages
301
No , they are not usually identified.

brendan
Just wondering, is there a reason why the company's are never named. I heard the ombudsman on the radio stating that hes not even required to mention cases or discuss them. Doesnt really clarify why companies arent named and shamed.
 

Jimbobp

Frequent Poster
Messages
592
You would think that naming & shaming of the companies in question would have a far greater effect than a fine.
 

NorthDrum

Frequent Poster
Messages
301
You would think that naming & shaming of the companies in question would have a far greater effect than a fine.
Exactly.

Im sure they have their reasons, I'm just wondering what they are!

To the normal Joe Soap it looks like the regulator is actually protecting the interests of the Life Companies.
 
Top