Roger came to us to investigate when his claim for legal expenses was turned down whilst he was pursuing a dispute about his work pension.
Roger called his insurer as he wanted to make a claim for legal expenses cover. This was due to Roger pursuing a dispute about a work pension.
His insurers said that Roger wasn't strictly an employee and so his dispute wasn't actually about an employer. They said that the insurance was part of a package for police officers. Officers would pay a subscription, including the cost of representation by the Police Federation. This would be for members in disputes arising from their jobs. The legal expenses cover that Roger was claiming was intended to cover matters unrelated to their work.
Roger came to us as he wanted to challenge the decision to decline his claim.
What we said
As we looked at both sides of the story, it became clear that there wasn't any cover for a dispute relating to Roger's position as a police officer. The cover stated that it excluded 'anything arising from or relating to you being, or having been, a police officer'.
Any help that Roger needed for his pension dispute would be provided by the Police Federation instead of the legal expenses cover. So we decided not to uphold Roger's complaint.
Related case studies
Employee seeking legal support for employment tribunal has claim rejected
Insurer’s choice of solicitors creates conflict of interest