AXA Insurance UK Plc · DRN-6171291

The complaint Mrs M and Mr M complain about AXA Insurance UK Plc’s handling of their buildings insurance claim. All references to AXA also include its appointed agents. What happened The details of the complaint are well known to both parties, so I won’t repeat them in detail here. The following is a summary of the events that led to this complaint. • In 2021, Mrs M and Mr M’s tenant reported a blockage in the toilet. • Mrs M and Mr M instructed a contractor to investigate and said they found the issue to be a collapsed pipe by a retaining wall in the garden. • Mrs M and Mr M had the pipe repaired by their contractor. The work included costs for rebuilding a patio, which Mrs M and Mr M said was also damaged as part of conducting the repairs. • They contacted AXA in June 2021 to make a claim. • AXA asked Mrs M and Mr M to provide reports and invoices from the contractor so it could consider the claim. • Mrs M and Mr M explained, due to personal issues, there was a delay in providing this. They sent invoices and photos to AXA in February 2023. • AXA declined the claim in January 2024. It said no reports were provided explaining the cause of the damage. It had only received photos and an invoice, which didn’t show what happened, simply what work had been carried out. So, it hadn’t been shown a valid claim existed under the terms of the policy. • Mrs M and Mr M raised a complaint with AXA. They said they hadn’t been notified the claim was declined, or what was needed by AXA to rectify the situation. • In its final response of February 2025, AXA reiterated it hadn’t received sufficient evidence of how the damage occurred. It said its agents acted as it would expect and maintained its decision that a valid claim hadn’t been shown under the terms of the policy. • Mrs M and Mr M were unhappy, so brought the complaint to our service. They said they provided several things to help AXA validate the claim, including photos, invoices, and a statement from their contractor. They reiterated AXA failed to set out what evidence it needed. Our investigator’s view Our investigator didn’t recommend the complaint be upheld. He said the evidence provided by Mrs M and Mr M didn’t provide any explanation or context to how the pipe was damaged. He added there was no photos of the damage to the patio.

-- 1 of 3 --

He concluded AXA hadn’t been unreasonable in its handling of the claim. He said it had been clear throughout why the information Mrs M and Mr M provided wasn’t sufficient and in requesting reports detailing the cause of damage. Mrs M and Mr M didn’t agree. They reiterated AXA hadn’t been clear why the claim hadn’t been accepted. Had it done so, Mrs M and Mr M said they would have obtained the information it asked for. 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 agree with the conclusions reached by the investigator for these reasons: • A key principle of making a claim under an insurance policy, is the policyholder must show they have a valid claim under the terms and conditions. • The policy does cover accidental damage to drains and pipes. ‘Accidental damage’ isn’t defined in the policy wording, but I’ve thought about the general meaning here - being damage that happens suddenly and is unforeseen. • Mrs M and Mr M had already had the repairs carried out before making a claim, so AXA would need to see evidence to validate any potential claim. Which isn’t unusual or unreasonable. • AXA said in several emails to Mrs M and Mr M that it hadn’t seen any evidence of accidental damage from the information they provided. It also set out most of the images were of the garden and not the drains. So didn’t support how the damage has been caused to the pipes. It considered a short video sent by Mrs M and Mr M but said this didn’t show anything dissimilar to the photos. • I can see one of the photos, and the video, shows what is clearly a damaged pipe, but there isn’t any further detail explaining how this occurred, such as a report of any inspections, or drainage surveys. • In addition, I’ve not seen anything showing the damage to the patio, only photos of it after it was rebuilt. Additionally, the photos don’t show the whole garden, and things such as the location of the pipe in relation to the home, and the patio. • I also considered the statement from Mrs M and Mr M’s contractor, but this only sets out the work they carried out. Not any detail about the cause of the damage. • So, taking this into account I don’t think AXA has acted unreasonably in asking for more information or in concluding it hasn’t been clearly shown a valid claim exists. • I can see AXA asked Mrs M and Mr M to send across any reports or invoices relating to the claim for it to review in several emails, including in both June 2021 and March 2022. • When Mrs M and Mr M got back in touch in 2023, I can also see AXA specifically asked them to send over a detailed report outlining the issues, with the possible cause of damage and a site plan of the property. I can see AXA also discussed them providing further information over the phone between 2023 and 2024. • In summary I think AXA has been clear about what it required. And as I’ve set out above, I think it has been reasonable in its handling of the claim. So, for these reasons, I do not uphold this complaint.

-- 2 of 3 --

My final decision My final decision is that I do not uphold Mrs M and Mr M’s complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mrs M and Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 27 April 2026. Michael Baronti Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --