Acasta European Insurance Company Limited · DRN-6013567

The complaint Mr M has complained about Acasta European Insurance Company Limited’s handling of his claim under his furniture protection policy. Where I refer to Acasta, this includes the actions of its agents and claims handlers for which it takes responsibility. What happened • Mr M holds a furniture protection plan for his sofa, which is underwritten by Acasta. • In March 2025, he made a claim for accidental damage after causing a stain to his sofa. • Acasta sent out a technician twice, but they were unable to repair it. So, Mr M was offered a replacement cover, which he accepted. • Following issues with service and delivery, Mr M says he complained to Acasta and was offered £172 to have the replacement covers fitted privately and also paid £100 compensation. • Our Investigator looked into it and noted that Mr M had said one of the replacement covers had not been delivered. He suggested they redeliver the missing part (on top of the £172) and pay a further £100 with an apology. • Mr M accepted this, although he said he didn’t want another apology. • Acasta didn’t agree. They said they’d provided evidence that the correct replacement parts had been delivered and had done enough to put things right for Mr M. • As Acasta disagrees, the complaint 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 agree with the outcome recommended by the Investigator. I’ll explain why. Mr M’s policy provides for cover (repair or replacement) in the event of accidental staining to his sofa fabric. Acasta don’t dispute that an insured event has occurred. Acasta sent an engineer to attend and attempt repair through cleaning the stain, but this wasn’t possible. Acasta’s offer of replacement covers and to pay for private installation of them (£172), seems fair and was accepted by Mr M.

-- 1 of 2 --

However, Mr M says he hasn’t received one of the parts (the main base material). Whilst Acasta have disputed this (providing evidence of the order and packing list) I am satisfied Mr M didn’t receive it. I say this because he has been consistent since his complaint email from August 2025 that a replacement part was missing. Mr M has also provided evidence and an account of how the packaging arrived and a part might have gone missing. The reports from Acasta that it was sent don’t mean it arrived and there is no reason to disbelieve Mr M. Acasta should therefore arrange a redelivery of the missing part, under the terms of the policy. I also don’t think Acasta have compensated Mr M sufficiently. They have paid £100 following their response in August 2025. However, more than six months have passed since then and without Mr M having full use or enjoyment of the sofa. He has also had to repeat his account several times as I believe his complaint that the part had not been delivered correctly (rather than not been sent) had been misinterpreted. In summary, Acasta haven’t ensured deliver of the missing cover and need to redeliver it and pay the £172 for installation that they offered. They should pay a further £100 to recognise the further impact this has had on Mr M. Putting things right To put things right, Acasta European Insurance Company Limited should: • Redeliver the missing part to Mr M. • Pay Mr M the amount previously offered (£172) for him to have the repair completed, if they haven’t already done so. • Pay Mr M a further £100 compensation (total £200). My final decision For the reasons set out above, I uphold this complaint and require Acasta European Insurance Company Limited to put things right, as I have set out above. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Mr M to accept or reject my decision before 20 April 2026. Yoni Smith Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --