Aviva Insurance Limited · DRN-6219400

The complaint Ms B complains that Aviva Insurance Limited mishandled her claim on a motor insurance policy. What happened The subject matter of the insurance, the claim and the complaint is a car with a diesel engine and first registered in 2010. Ms B acquired the car not later than February 2023, the date of its most recent V5 registration document. From its MOT history, the car passed a test in February 2024 with a recorded mileage of about 107,000. Ms B had the car insured on a comprehensive policy with Aviva. On 16 November 2024, Ms B re-fuelled the car at a filling station. On about 19 November 2024, the car broke down. Ms B called for help under her breakdown cover. A recovery agent towed the car to a local garage. The garage invoice included the following: “Carried out diagnosis. Found contaminated fuel in the system. Cloudy and sediments found in the fuel. Sample provided to the customer. Cleaned the fuel system. Removed and cleaned the Fuel injector. Cleaned the tank…” The garage invoice also included a replacement fuel filter. On 23 November 2024, Ms B took the car back to the garage. The garage invoice included the following: “two injectors suffered from dirty fuel damage – replaced, found the high-pressure fuel pump damaged from contaminated fuel.” The garage replaced the injectors and fuel pump. Following the repairs, Ms B still reported that the car suffered from strong vibrations. On about 30 December 2024, Ms B made a claim with Aviva for damage to the car. Aviva declined the claim, saying that the faults was wear and tear.

-- 1 of 3 --

Ms B disagreed. Aviva reviewed and confirmed its decision. Ms B complained to Aviva that it should pay the claim. By a final response dated 3 April 2025, Aviva turned down the complaint. Ms B brought her complaint to us in late September 2025. Our investigator didn’t recommend (on 12 November 2025) that the complaint should be upheld. She didn’t think that Aviva had unfairly declined the claim. Ms B disagreed with the investigator’s opinion and provided further information. Our investigator still didn’t recommend (on 27 January 2026) that the complaint should be upheld. She didn’t think that Avia had declined the claim unfairly. She thought that Ms B had been unable to evidence that the faults were caused by an insured event, rather than mechanical breakdown caused by wear and tear. Ms B disagreed with the investigator’s opinion. Our investigator asked for an ombudsman to review the complaint. 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. The policy covered accidental damage to the car. The policy didn’t cover wear and tear or mechanical breakdown. I accept that Ms B’s garage diagnosed dirty fuel. Later the garage said that the dirty fuel had damaged fuel injectors and the fuel pump. However, the garage didn’t take or store the fuel sample in sterile conditions. Rather it put the fuel in an empty water bottle. Ms B didn’t get it tested in November 2024. Ms B didn’t involve Aviva until the end of 2024. Aviva got a vehicle salvage company to collect the car and the garage’s fuel sample from Ms B. On 14 January 2025, the salvage company inspected the car and took a further fuel sample. Tests of both samples showed no evidence of petrol. Ms B’s garage’s sample was contaminated with water and fine debris. I accept Ms B’s evidence from the filling station that its tests were negative for water contamination. I also accept Ms B’s evidence from another customer who suffered faults after using the same filling station. However, that was nearly two months after 16 November 2024. The salvage company confirmed excessive knocking from the engine. On the recommendation of the salvage company, the car was taken to a main dealer.

-- 2 of 3 --

The salvage company quoted the main dealer’s technician as having explained that the knocking noises were due to wear and tear of an old diesel engine and that once the engine had warmed up the noises disappeared. The main dealer reported numerous faults, including a worn clutch, but none related to dirty fuel. Weighing up all the evidence, I find that Ms B has fallen short of showing that the filling station sold her contaminated fuel that caused the breakdown on 19 November 2024 or the expense of the garage invoices including the replacement fuel pump. So I don’t consider that Aviva treated Ms B unfairly by deciding that she hadn’t shown that contaminated fuel had accidentally damaged the car (as opposed to wear and tear). Therefore I don’t find it fair and reasonable to direct Aviva to do any more in response to Ms B’s complaint. My final decision For the reasons I’ve explained, my final decision is that I don’t uphold this complaint. I don’t direct Aviva Insurance Limited to do any more in response to this complaint. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Ms B to accept or reject my decision before 14 April 2026. Christopher Gilbert Ombudsman

-- 3 of 3 --