Red Sands Insurance Company · DRN-6285294

The complaint Mrs S complains that Red Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited unfairly applied a policy excess to a claim under her pet insurance policy. Where I refer to Red Sands, this includes the actions of its agents and claims handlers for which it takes responsibility. What happened The detailed background to this complaint is well known to both parties, so I’ll only summarise the key events here. • Mrs S held a pet insurance policy for her dog, underwritten by Red Sands. • In 2025, Mrs S’ dog became unwell. When he didn’t improve, Mrs S made the difficult decision to put him to sleep. She made a claim on her policy for the cost of the euthanasia. • Red Sands accepted the claim, but as the policy excess exceeded the amount claimed for, there was nothing payable under the policy. • Mrs S didn’t think this was fair, so she raised a complaint which she’s brought to our Service. She says the policy isn’t clear that the excess applies to euthanasia claims and that this wasn’t a new condition for which an excess is due. She’s also unhappy Red Sands didn’t inform her of the policy excess when she enquired about how to make the claim. • Our Investigator didn’t uphold the complaint. She was satisfied Red Sands had handled the claim in accordance with the policy terms and hadn’t treated Mrs S unfairly. As Mrs S didn’t agree with our Investigator, the complaint was passed to me to decide. And I issued the following provisional decision. My provisional decision I’ve reached a different outcome to our Investigator. Before I explain why, I wish to acknowledge the parties’ submissions in respect of this complaint. Whilst I’ve read them all, I won’t comment in detail on every single point that has been made. Instead, I’ll focus on the key points that are relevant to the outcome I’ve reached. That’s in line with our remit, which is to resolve complaints promptly and with minimal formality. The terms and conditions of Mrs S’ pet insurance policy say: “Your excess

-- 1 of 3 --

Your excess of £250 is the amount you’ll need to pay if your pet becomes unwell or is injured and you need to make a claim. You’ll need to pay this excess for each condition you claim for every policy year. For any claims where [your pet] has damaged someone else’s property your excess is £250 for each claim.” The policy goes on to list four sections of cover, namely: 1. “If your pet becomes unwell or is injured” 2. “If your pet passes away” 3. “If your pet is lost or stolen” 4. “If your pet is responsible for injury or damage”. The definition of the policy excess above only refers to an excess being payable when the “pet becomes unwell or is injured” – which is section one – or where the pet is responsible for damage – which is section four. It makes no mention of a policy excess being payable when a pet passes away which is the section Mrs S has claimed under. Furthermore, under sections one and four, the policy reiterates that a policy excess is payable. But it is silent on the policy excess under sections two and three. This further implies that the policy excess isn’t payable for these types of claims. As such, I’m not persuaded Mrs S’ claim attracts an excess. So it follows that I’m not satisfied Red Sands has handled this claim in line with the policy terms and treated Mrs S fairly. I intend to direct it to pay the claim in full plus interest for the time Mrs S has been without this money. I’ve no doubt Red Sands’ actions would’ve caused Mrs S distress and inconvenience. And this would’ve had more of an impact given Mrs S was already grieving the loss of her pet. So I intend to award compensation of £150. Responses to my provisional decision. Mrs S accepted my provisional decision. Red Sands didn’t respond. 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. As neither party had any further submissions for my consideration, I see no reason to deviate from the outcome explained in my provisional decision. My final decision For the reasons I’ve explained, I uphold this complaint and direct Red Sands Insurance Company (Europe) Limited to: • Pay the claim in full plus 8% simple interest from the date Mrs S paid the vet until the date she is reimbursed; and • Pay £150 compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs S to accept or

-- 2 of 3 --

reject my decision before 11 May 2026. Sheryl Sibley Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --