U K Insurance Limited · DRN-6117131

The complaint Miss S complained that U K Insurance Limited (“UKI”) cancelled her home buildings insurance meaning she was unable to make a claim following damage caused by an escape of water. What happened Miss S said she called UKI on 28 August 2025 to make a claim following a leak in her kitchen. She was told her policy had been cancelled. Miss S said this was because there was a block on her policy renewing. She didn’t think this was fair and complained. In its final complaint response UKI told Miss S that a renewal bar was in place because of arrears relating to a previous motor insurance policy. It said it had since removed the bar, which meant future renewals won’t be prevented. UKI explained that it sent three documents to Miss S. This was to inform her that her policy would not automatically renew. The business said she was told to make contact if she wanted the policy to renew. No contact was made so the policy was not renewed. Miss S didn’t think UKI had treated her fairly and referred her complaint to our service. Our investigator didn’t uphold it. She was satisfied that Miss S was informed that she would need to make contact with UKI for her policy to renew. Miss S didn’t accept this outcome and asked for an ombudsman to consider her complaint. It has been passed to me to decide. 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. Having done so I’m not upholding this complaint. I’m sorry to disappoint Miss S. But I’ll explain why I think my decision is fair. In its submissions to our service UKI explained that a renewal invite was generated for Miss S in January 2025. However, it confirmed this information was not sent. It explained this was due to a system issue. But it confirmed that reminder letters were sent on 31 January and again on 7 February. The business has provided a screenshot showing these letters were generated by its system. I’ve seen a copy of both reminder letters. There were addressed correctly, which is to the same address we have for Miss S. I acknowledge her comments that she did not receive any letters. But I must base my findings on the available evidence. From what I’ve seen the indication is that two reminder letters were sent to Miss S. The first letter explained that UKI hadn’t received instructions to renew. It asked her to call before 12 February 2025. The second letter repeated this message. It also said it would provide a further 14 days cover from the renewal date to allow Miss S the opportunity to renew her policy.

-- 1 of 2 --

Miss S didn’t contact UKI to renew her policy. This isn’t disputed. So, her cover didn’t renew for the 2025-2026 policy year. We expect UKI to communicate clearly to inform Miss S about the renewal of her policy. I think it did so here. The renewal invite wasn’t sent but the evidence shows two reminders were. This informed Miss S she had to contact UKI for her policy to continue. As she didn’t make contact, I don’t think the business acted unfairly when it didn’t renew the policy. I’ve thought carefully about the bar that was placed on the policy preventing it from automatically renewing. I don’t think UKI’s explanation is clear. But this is essentially a moot point. Even if the bar was placed in error, I’m satisfied that Miss S was contacted to inform her that her policy would not renew automatically. So, she still had the opportunity to ensure cover was in place. Miss S confirmed that she didn’t receive renewal documents for the 2025-2026 policy year. And she paid no premiums from February 2025 up until she tried to claim in August. This should reasonably have alerted Miss S to an issue with her cover. I can’t see that she contacted UKI to query this. Had she done so this situation could have been avoided. We asked UKI to search its call records for contact from Miss S as she said she had been in contact with the business. However, UKI could not find any record of a call to its building’s insurance team. Having considered all of this I don’t think UKI treated Miss S unfairly when her policy was not renewed. So, although I’m sorry that she is unable to make a claim for the damage she reported, I can’t reasonably ask it to do anymore. My final decision My final decision is that I do not uphold this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss S to accept or reject my decision before 25 May 2026. Mike Waldron Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --