Evolution Insurance Company Limited · DRN-6249493

The complaint Mr S complains about Evolution Insurance Company Limited’s (“Evolution”) handling of his claim under his Home Emergency insurance policy. What happened Mr S says his heating and hot water stopped working so he made a claim under his policy. He says he was diverted to an online claims portal where he logged his claim and selected an appointment date for an engineer to attend two days later. An engineer was then travelling to Mr S’s property when he was informed that Mr S had already made arrangements for the repairs to be carried out by another contractor. Mr S then complained about Evolution’s handling of his claim. He said, given his disability, he found the experience of logging his claim challenging as he was being diverted to an online claim portal. He said the situation was an emergency as he had no heating or hot water, yet the earliest appointment date available was two days later. Mr S also complained about Evolution’s communication. In particular, he said he’d informed them about his disability and specifically requested they contact him by email, and not to call. He says, despite this, he still received phone calls. Mr S also said Evolution should reimburse him a fee of £160 he would now incur as a result of having to arrange the repairs himself. Evolution responded and explained Mr S logged a claim online and booked an engineer visit based on the availability of engineers online at the time. They said they were aware and understood Mr S had a vulnerability and said they asked him to supply those details, and it was logged on to their system. Evolution said they had no record of Mr S requesting an earlier appointment and they could’ve reviewed this had Mr S made contact with them. They said Mr S, instead, opted to resolve the issue independently and didn’t give Evolution a chance to try to assist him. They said Mr S agreed to the appointment date himself when logging the claim. They said, getting the repair carried out independently was solely Mr S’s own decision as he hadn’t informed Evolution or taken prior authorisation. Evolution said, on this basis, they aren’t liable for any cost incurred under the terms of the policy and referred to a section which said policyholders shouldn’t make arrangements themselves without prior authorisation from Evolution, otherwise they wouldn’t reimburse any costs incurred. Evolution also said Mr S didn’t call out an independent engineer but rather took out new cover from a third party, and the evidence Mr S had provided wasn’t sufficient as they weren’t even sure if the repair carried out was covered by Evolution or not. They said they can’t therefore offer Mr S reimbursement of £160. Evolution said they understand Mr S wasn’t happy about receiving a call despite his ongoing complaint. They apologised and said they would ensure such an incident doesn’t occur in the future. Evolution offered Mr S a free cancellation of his policy should he wish to discontinue his cover with them, along with a refund of £20. They said, considering Mr S didn’t call and cancel the appointment, and Evolution’s engineer was en route to Mr S when he notified him not to attend, Evolution still offered a free cancellation and a refund.

-- 1 of 4 --

After considering all of the evidence, I issued a provisional decision on this complaint to Mr S and Evolution on 20 March 2026. In my provisional decision I said as follows: “My role requires me to say how a complaint should be settled quickly and with minimal formality and so I’ll focus on what I consider to be the crux of the complaint and the main areas of dispute. Claim handling The information shows Mr S logged his claim through an online claim portal on 15 March 2025. I acknowledge Mr S says he was diverted to the portal, but it’s not the role of our service to direct a business to change its processes. The information shows Mr S was able to access the portal, register his claim and arrange an appointment for 17 March. Given that Mr S reported having no heating and hot water, I think it’s safe and fair to say Mr S would likely have chosen the next available appointment date. This was two days later and, although I acknowledge Mr S complains there wasn’t any available appointments for the same day or next day, I can’t say Evolution have acted unfairly here. There will be occasions where earlier appointments might not be available, and the policy terms and conditions does say, “We’ll try to deliver your repair or assistance as quickly as is reasonably possible.” The information shows Mr S then, prior to the engineer’s visit, made his own arrangements for the repairs to be carried out. Mr S says he had a separate financial product which provided home emergency cover, but this had lapsed. Mr S says he contacted the provider as he found a two day wait for an Evolution engineer to be unacceptable, and the provider agreed to provide cover but on the condition that Mr S sign up to a new policy. Mr S says he therefore made a commitment to return to the provider as a customer. He says although he didn’t pay the £160 directly, he had to take out a policy in order for the repairs to be authorised. I do acknowledge Mr S felt the situation warranted a repair sooner than the two days he would’ve had to wait for Evolution’s engineer, but I can’t see Mr S contacted Evolution to discuss whether an earlier appointment was available or raise a concern about the urgency of the situation and ask whether there were any alternative options available. Instead, Mr S took out a separate policy to cover the repairs without first allowing Evolution an opportunity to try and provide further assistance. I can see Mr S says he made several attempts to contact Evolution, through the online portal, to try and get authorisation for him to arrange his own repairs, but he was ignored. Evolution have provided information showing all contact made through the online portal, and I can’t see there were any messages from Mr S asking for further assistance to get an earlier appointment. I also have to take into account the policy terms and conditions does say, “Please do not make arrangements yourself without prior authorisation from us. If you do, we will not reimburse costs you incur.” So, given that there’s no evidence Mr S did get prior authorisation from Evolution, it follows that I don’t think it’s reasonable in the circumstances for Evolution to pay Mr S the fee of £160. Customer service issues In their complaint response, Evolution accepted they’d made an error which involved their staff contacting Mr S by phone. I can see Evolution apologised and said they would ensure this wouldn’t happen again. But I don’t think this goes far enough to

-- 2 of 4 --

recognise the impact on Mr S. Call notes provided by Evolution show that, during a phone call on 17 March, Mr S made it very clear that he only wanted to be contacted by email and he also explained this was to be treated as a reasonable adjustment due to his disability. Despite this, Evolution then called Mr S again on 23 April – during which Mr S again reminded them that he’d already asked for contact to be made by email, and not by phone. There was then a further call later that day, which the call notes suggest was late in the evening. During this call Mr S again referred to his request for email contact only and expressed his concern that his request wasn’t being communicated through to different departments at Evolution. Mr S also set out his concern that his request wasn’t being taken seriously. So, taking this all into account, there’s a couple of issues here. Firstly, there’s a request from Mr S which Evolution haven’t followed on two occasions. Then there’s the fact that Evolution were on notice that the request was being made as a reasonable adjustment to provide Mr S with support due to his disability. So, I’m under no doubt that the two phone calls did cause Mr S upset and frustration, and this is supported by comments made by Mr S to the call handlers during the phone calls. So, given the impact on Mr S and the duration of that impact, I think Evolution should pay Mr S £100 compensation. I can see Evolution have offered Mr S the option of cancelling his policy at no cost. They’ve also offered a refund of £20 – which appears to be a refund of the premiums Mr S had paid so far up to that point. I can see there has been further communication between Mr S and Evolution during which it has been established Mr S doesn’t have dual cover, and the policy will continue with Evolution. So, as opposed to the £20 refund offered by Evolution, they should instead pay £100 compensation to Mr S. Complaints handling I can see Mr S has also made some specific points about Evolution’s complaints handling. Complaint handling isn’t a regulated or other covered activity. So as a general rule, and in line with the law, if the complaint is solely about complaint handling, we wouldn’t be able to look into things. Where complaint handling forms a part of a customer’s complaint, then we can take into account complaint handling when looking at the overall customer experience. In this case, I can’t say the issues which Mr S raises about the complaints handling are an extension of the issues which relate to regulated activities, so I can’t look into the complaint handling part of the complaint. I wish to reassure Mr S I’ve read and considered everything he has sent in, but if I haven’t mentioned a particular point or piece of evidence, it isn’t because I haven’t seen it or thought about it. It’s just that I don’t feel I need to reference it to explain my decision. This isn’t intended as a discourtesy and is a reflection of the informal nature of our service.” So, subject to any further comments from Mr S or Evolution, my provisional decision was that I was minded to uphold this complaint and require Evolution to pay Mr S compensation of £100. Following my provisional decision, both Mr S and Evolution have responded to say they accept my decision. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable

-- 3 of 4 --

in the circumstances of this complaint. Having done so, I see no reason to depart from my provisional decision. So, I’ve decided to uphold the complaint for the reasons set out in my provisional decision and copied above. Putting things right I’ve taken the view that there has been an error in the way Evolution communicated with Mr S. So, Evolution should pay Mr S £100 compensation for the upset and frustration caused. My final decision My final decision is that I uphold the complaint. Evolution Insurance Company Limited must take the steps in accordance with what I’ve said under “Putting things right” above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr S to accept or reject my decision before 22 April 2026. Paviter Dhaddy Ombudsman

-- 4 of 4 --