They said you told them too late.
Late isn’t the same as prejudiced.
Policies ask you to report promptly, and that is fair enough. But a delay that cost the insurer nothing is a thin reason to refuse a valid claim — and that is usually the question that decides it.
Who's behind thisSteve Smart Helped people recover £25M+ from rejected claimsRe: Your claim
Dear ,
We have now completed our review of your claim.
You did not notify us of the incident within the timescale set out in your policy.The claim was reported 47 days after the event, in breach of the notification condition.Your late notification has prejudiced our ability to investigate this matter.Notification within 30 days is a condition precedent to liability under this policy.
We therefore regret that we are unable to meet your claim on this occasion.
Yours sincerely,
Claims Department
What they mean
Almost every policy asks you to tell the insurer about an incident promptly, or within a stated window. The reason is legitimate: they want to inspect damage while it is fresh, gather evidence, and control the cost of putting it right.
When a claim is reported outside that window, the notification condition gives them a clean procedural reason to say no — one that never has to engage with whether the claim itself is any good.
Where it overreaches
The question that usually decides these cases is not whether you were late. It is whether being late actually made any difference. If the insurer could still investigate, still inspect, and still assess the claim properly, a refusal built purely on the calendar is on weak ground.
Life also explains a great many delays. People are in hospital, bereaved, abroad, or dealing with the emergency itself. Some do not realise for weeks that what happened was even claimable.
And the wording matters more than the letter usually admits. There is a real difference between a condition precedent to liability and an ordinary condition, and insurers describe the second as though it were the first surprisingly often.
The counter-arguments
These are the points that put the burden back where it belongs. Not every one will apply to your case — the letter we write picks the ones that do.
This is the heart of it. Make them state, specifically, what they were unable to do because you reported when you did — what evidence was lost, what inspection became impossible, what cost increased.
If the honest answer is "nothing", they are refusing a valid claim over a date. That is exactly the kind of position the Ombudsman is unsympathetic to, and pressing it in writing tends to produce either a concrete answer or a change of heart.
A condition precedent to liability has to be clearly expressed as one. Plenty of notification clauses are ordinary conditions, and breaching an ordinary condition does not automatically wipe out the claim.
Ask them to point to the exact wording they are relying on and read it carefully. The gap between what the clause says and how the refusal characterises it is often the whole argument.
Being in hospital, dealing with a bereavement, being abroad, or not appreciating that an incident was claimable are all reasons a fair decision-maker will weigh. Set out the actual chronology plainly and evidence it where you can.
A delay with a reason behind it reads very differently from indifference, and insurers reviewing a complaint know it.
Insurers must handle claims promptly and fairly and must not unreasonably reject a claim. Using a technical breach that harmed nobody to avoid an otherwise valid payout invites exactly that challenge.
It is also worth noting if the insurer took its own time at any stage. Firms that have been leisurely themselves are poorly placed to be strict about your calendar.
FCA ICOBS 8.1.1RSources: FCA Handbook — ICOBS 8.1 (claims handling)
How it works
You do not have to make these arguments yourself. That is what we are for.
Describe in plain English what happened and your current concern. Takes 60 seconds. We'll give you clear guidance on whether we can help and what to do next - completely free. You can start right now, even if you don't have your refusal letter with you.
Drop your refusal letter and insurance policy. Takes 2 minutes. No account needed.
Our system identifies the legal flaws in the refusal and writes a professional rebuttal with citations.
Send the letter to your insurer. Most reverse their decision. If not, escalate to the Ombudsman.
Start free. Pay only if we can help you win.
A small one-off fixed fee - not a lawyer's hourly bill.
Questions
Not straightforwardly. The question that usually decides it is whether the delay actually prejudiced them — whether it stopped them investigating or assessing the claim properly.
If it made no practical difference, a refusal resting on the date alone is challengeable.
It means the insurer says that complying with that condition is a precondition of them paying anything at all. It is a strong form of wording and it has to be clearly expressed.
Many notification clauses are ordinary conditions rather than conditions precedent, and the difference matters — ask them to point to the exact wording.
It should be weighed. The reason for a delay is relevant to whether refusing on that basis is fair, and being physically unable to report is about as good a reason as exists.
Set out the chronology in writing and evidence it where you can.
It depends on your policy — some say "as soon as reasonably possible", others give a specific window such as 30 days. Check the wording rather than assuming.
If you are already outside it, that is not the end of the matter: the practical effect of the delay usually matters more than the deadline itself.
No. smarterclaims publishes legal information and writes letters you can send yourself — like a digital version of a published legal guide. We are not a law firm and we do not give advice.
If your case needs professional representation, we will tell you, and we can introduce you to the right people if you ask us to.
Checking whether you have a case is free. You see the analysis and the arguments before you pay anything.
The rebuttal letter is £49.99. It comes with an explanation of where you stand and a step-by-step plan.
There is a no-questions-asked money-back guarantee. If the pack is not useful, tell us within 14 days and we refund you in full.
It should not, and firms are required to handle complaints fairly. Insurers deal with complaints as routine business — a well-argued letter tends to be taken more seriously than an angry phone call, not less.
Free tool | Before anything goes wrong
Still haven't filed a claim?
Completely free. Get ahead of a refusal before it ever happens — check your cover for the gaps insurers rely on, so you can avoid the pitfalls and traps. No charge, no account.
Policy check
See where your cover falls short — before you ever need to use it.
Meet Steve Who's behind this
Forty years inside the insurance industry, in both senior legal and commercial roles. Former UK General Counsel at AIG. Current Chairman of Lancashire Insurance UK. Regular voice on LBC radio. Steve has watched the same disputes come up again and again — and built the library of arguments that smarterclaims runs on, based on his decades of experience.
“I've spent forty years on the inside of insurance. The same excuses come up again and again, and most consumers don't know how to overcome them. This is the tool I wish my clients had before they called me.”Steve SmartMore about Steve
Real people, real results
“After being injured in action, my military insurer tried to argue that my injuries weren't permanent — so they'd pay me only a small percentage of the policy limit. Steve identified several arguments to challenge their refusal, and they ended up paying me virtually the full policy limit.”
“After a major house fire destroyed our contents, our insurer said we were under-insured — and that they'd only pay a fraction of our claim. Your know-how helped us overcome their excuse and get everything we were asking for.”
“Following a house fire, my insurer's loss adjuster argued that a lot of the damage was excluded. Steve identified the arguments to make, and they ended up paying our claim in full.”
“When my husband's physiotherapy practice was forced to close temporarily due to a virus, our insurer said it wasn't on their list of diseases and wouldn't pay anything towards our loss of earnings. The arguments you came up with convinced them to pay up.”
“After a car crash that wasn't my fault, the insurer tried to write off my car for far less than it was worth. You guided me through exactly what I had to do and say — everything was clear and easy to understand, and I got the full amount I was owed.”
Real clients we have helped, shared with their written permission.
Claim smarter.
Describe what happened. We'll match it to the argument, and you'll have the rebuttal in minutes.