DRN-6211136

The complaint Mr and Mrs J have complained that Admiral Insurance (Gibraltar) Limited have caused delays and failed to keep them updated about a claim made under Mrs J’s car insurance policy. Mr J is a named driver under Mrs J’s policy with Admiral. What happened In February 2023 Mrs J’s car was involved in an incident with a third party vehicle. Mrs J made a claim for the damage to her car under her policy with Admiral. Admiral accepted the claim. In 2025 Mr J complained to Admiral. He said they were unhappy with the lack of updates about the claim. He wanted Admiral to reimburse them for the excess Mrs J had paid when making her claim. In June 2025 Admiral didn’t uphold the complaint. It said it had passed the case to its solicitors and they were dealing with the matter on Admiral’s behalf. Admiral said it passed Mr and Mrs J’s complaint to the solicitors. Admiral said it should have acknowledged that Mr J had raised a complaint in February 2025, but it instead treated it as an enquiry. For this failure, Admiral paid a good will gesture payment of £25. In November 2025 Mr J asked us to look at their complaint. One of our Investigators explained that as solicitors were now dealing with the matter on Admiral’s behalf, the timeframe for the matter to conclude was outside of Admiral’s control. So he didn’t find Admiral was responsible for a delay as it had progressed the case as far as it could, given the third party representatives had not admitted liability. But the Investigator thought that Admiral should have kept Mr and Mrs J updated and that it was still Admiral’s responsibility after it had passed the matter to its solicitors. Although it didn’t change the outcome, the Investigator thought Admiral should pay Mr and Mrs J £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. Admiral accepted the Investigator’s view. Mr J disagreed. In summary he says this isn’t the first complaint they raised with Admiral since they made their claim. He believes Admiral hasn’t been transparent as it hasn’t referred to their previous complaints. Mr J says Admiral has continued to fail to provide updates to them. So Mr J wants an ombudsman to decide.

-- 1 of 3 --

What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable in the circumstances of this complaint. I am aware that Mr and Mrs J have raised previous complaints with Admiral. This service has investigated a previous complaint and that case was closed in 2023. My decision is about the complaint Mr and Mrs J brought to us following Admiral’s final response dated 30 June 2025. And as previously explained, this service cannot make a finding on the way an insurer handled a complaint. Complaints handling is not a regulated activity. The Financial Conduct Authority sets out what it calls regulated activities – and these are activities which we can investigate. Mr and Mrs J have complained that Admiral and its solicitors have failed to provide updates on the claim. As Admiral was unable to settle the claim with the third party, it passed the claim for Mr and Mrs J’s insured losses to its solicitors to pursue the matter through the courts. Unfortunately where a claim progresses this way, the timeframes are outside the control of the insurer. However, as Mr and Mrs J’s insurer, Admiral should continue to provide updates – although we consider it reasonable to do so on the basis of being meaningful, rather than simply on the basis of frequency. Up until Admiral issued its final response dated 30 June 2025, I think it could have done more to provide updates to Mr and Mrs J. I can appreciate that in their view, this matter is straight forward. So Mr and Mrs J believe the time it is taking to receive the excess back and have Mrs J’s No Claims Discount reinstated seems unreasonable. But because liability hadn’t been accepted by the third party, Mr and Mrs J’s claim is a disputed one. This inevitably means the matter will take longer to reach a conclusion. Taking this into account, I think a fair and reasonable outcome is for Admiral to pay Mr and Mrs J £100 compensation for failing to provide updates. I think Admiral should have provided updates to Mr and Mrs J as they are understandably relying on Admiral to progress the claim. It isn’t fair or reasonable for a customer to have little or no information from the insurer as to the progress of a claim under their policy. My final decision My final decision is that I uphold this complaint in part. I require Admiral Insurance Company (Gibraltar) Limited to pay Mr and Mrs J £100 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. Admiral Insurance Company (Gibraltar) Limited must pay the compensation within 28 days of the date on which we tell it Mr and Mrs J accept my final decision. If it pays later than this it must also pay interest on the compensation from the date of my final decision to the date of payment at a simple rate of 8% a year. If Admiral Insurance Company (Gibraltar) Limited considers that it’s required by HM Revenue & Customs to withhold income tax from that interest, it should tell Mr and Mrs J how much it’s taken off. It should also give Mr and Mrs J a tax deduction certificate if they ask for one, so they can reclaim the tax from HM Revenue & Customs if appropriate.

-- 2 of 3 --

Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr J and Mrs J to accept or reject my decision before 12 May 2026. Geraldine Newbold Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --