Somerset Bridge Insurance Services Limited · DRN-6219085

The complaint Miss M complains that Somerset Bridge Insurance Services Limited (‘SBISL’) – trading as GoSkippy – is asking her to pay an outstanding debt after she cancelled her motor insurance. What happened Miss M took out motor insurance online in March 2025 via a comparison website and arranged by SBISL. In September 2025 she cancelled the policy because she bought a new car and found cheaper cover elsewhere. SBISL told her there was an outstanding balance on the policy of £184.81. Miss M says, in summary: • SBISL failed to explain why there was an outstanding balance on her policy. • She doesn’t understand why she’d owe such a large amount when SBISL said it had waived the cancellation fee. • SBISL’s agent was “abrupt and rude”, and there were further customer service issues when she complained about this. SBISL explained that: • Miss M took out the policy on 31 March 2025. She cancelled it on 11 September. • She had to pay cancellation charges, as set out in its Terms of Business. These totalled £184.81. • It waived its £75 cancellation fee, so the remaining balance was £109.81. • It wrote to her on 18 September explaining how the balance was calculated. • It offered a further reduction of £35 as a gesture of goodwill to reflect poor service. • The remaining balance on the policy was £74.81. Miss M complained to this service. She’s unhappy with SBISL’s administration of her policy and the service provided. She’s also upset that it continues to threaten debt recovery action while her complaint is with us, causing her worry and stress. Our investigator recommended that the complaint should be upheld. She found that SBISL had failed to explain the arrangement fee when Miss M took out the policy, and wasn’t satisfied that the fee was proportionate. She also found that SBISL caused Miss M unnecessary distress and inconvenience when she cancelled the policy. She thought it should waive the remaining £74.81 to reduce the balance to zero. SBISL didn’t accept this, so the complaint was passed to me to make a final decision. What I’ve decided – and why I’ve considered all the available evidence and arguments to decide what’s fair and reasonable

-- 1 of 2 --

in the circumstances of this complaint. SBISL acknowledged that its service had been “substandard at times” but challenged our investigator’s findings. It said, in summary: • The arrangement fee of £247.25 “reflects the genuine administrative, operational, and regulatory costs incurred when setting up a policy.” • The fee was transparent, in line with FCA principles, and “clearly disclosed prior to purchase.” • It had already waived £110 from the outstanding balance, including the £75 cancellation fee. • It doesn’t agree that it would be reasonable to waive the remaining £74.81. I think this was a relatively straightforward situation and if SBISL had explained it properly when Miss M cancelled the policy I might agree with it. However, I don’t think SBISL’s explanations were clear. First, its Terms of Business – referenced in its final response to Miss M – doesn’t quote the arrangement fee. The £247.25 fee is set out in a separate document. SBISL hasn’t shown that Miss M was given this before she took out the policy. Second, its letter on 18 September shows the “total price of policy” as £2,118.57, the “cancellation refund from insurer” negative £1,151.58, “outstanding amount on finance agreement” £1,261.39, and “final outcome” £109.81. I don’t think that’s clear and I understand why Miss M might have found it confusing. It wasn’t until this service got involved that we had a clear breakdown of how the balance had been calculated. These figures differed from those in SBISL’s 18 September letter and I don’t think it ever provided the correct breakdown to Miss M. Finally, Miss M complained to us on 15 October. We notified SBISL about this on 24 October, yet it continued to write to Miss M demanding payment and threatening to “refer [Miss M] to our debt collection agency”. Given the circumstances of this complaint, and the fact the debt was being challenged, I don’t think this was reasonable. Putting things right I think the fairest resolution to the complaint is for SBISL to waive the outstanding balance on the policy. Given it immediately agreed to waive the cancellation fee, it will have paid just over £100 to reflect its poor handling of this matter. In the circumstances, I think that’s fair. My final decision My final decision is that I uphold the complaint and order Somerset Bridge Insurance Services Limited to: • Waive the remaining £74.81 on Miss M’s motor insurance policy, reducing the balance to zero; and • Stop any recovery action against her. Under the rules of the Financial Ombudsman Service, I’m required to ask Miss M to accept or reject my decision before 25 April 2026. Simon Begley Ombudsman

-- 2 of 2 --