We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
MSE News: Claimants protected under insurance overhaul
Former_MSE_Guy
Posts: 1,650 Forumite
This is the discussion thread for the following MSE News Story:
"Insurers will no longer be able to refuse a claim where they have failed to ask the right questions, under government plans ..."
"Insurers will no longer be able to refuse a claim where they have failed to ask the right questions, under government plans ..."
0
Comments
-
Good.
Hopefully it's the first in a lot of legislation that's needed to police the industry.0 -
Looks like it might be progress but all it seems to be doing is formalising what the FOS do already.
As always, the devil’s in the detail and the danger is that by formalising it the areas it covers will be out of the remit of the FOS (“treat the punter fairly” & free) and into the remit of the courts (“strict letter of the law” & expensive)0 -
Looks like it might be progress but all it seems to be doing is formalising what the FOS do already.
As always, the devil’s in the detail and the danger is that by formalising it the areas it covers will be out of the remit of the FOS (“treat the punter fairly” & free) and into the remit of the courts (“strict letter of the law” & expensive)
It should apply to both.
Yet the key is by enshrining it in this way it should stop companies doing it in the first place - rather than relying on only educated consumers having to go to the OmbudsmanMartin Lewis, Money Saving Expert.
Please note, answers don't constitute financial advice, it is based on generalised journalistic research. Always ensure any decision is made with regards to your own individual circumstance.Don't miss out on urgent MoneySaving, get my weekly e-mail at www.moneysavingexpert.com/tips.Debt-Free Wannabee Official Nerd Club: (Honorary) Members number 0000 -
Devils in the detail.....
Look at unfair bank charges, when the FOS were dealing with it people were getting them back easily then the banks throw a heap of money into getting a higher court ruling, that sets a precedent and now the chances of getting charges back are much much less0 -
The next thing to target is auto renewal.
I'm not proposing it should be banished, just made fair.
There's been quite a few posts on here where the customer either has been away, or the first correspondence has been the new policy.
Auto renewal should be at the same price that a new quote would be, and not inflated by 100% in the hope it's not noticed.
If the customer can provide a much cheaper quote from the same company, after the event, the company should match it, and refund. (And ideally be fined for not renewing at that price in the first place).
There should be a period of say a month, when the insurance can be cancelled for just the pro rata charge, (of the price above, not the inflated renewal price) to enable the customer to move, if they didn't want to renew, but it happened anyway.
That would improve it.0 -
Change the record.0
-
It doesn't sound like this will have much impact on motor insurance. And the thing which you singularly fail to realise about auto-renewal is that most people don't complain about it.0
-
If you believe it's a fair system, and should be left as it is, ok, that's your opinion.
I'm sure most people can make up their own minds on how fair it is, and if it needs changing from the number of threads on here about it.0 -
The next thing to target is auto renewal.
I'm not proposing it should be banished, just made fair.
There's been quite a few posts on here where the customer either has been away, or the first correspondence has been the new policy.
Auto renewal should be at the same price that a new quote would be, and not inflated by 100% in the hope it's not noticed.
If the customer can provide a much cheaper quote from the same company, after the event, the company should match it, and refund. (And ideally be fined for not renewing at that price in the first place).
There should be a period of say a month, when the insurance can be cancelled for just the pro rata charge, (of the price above, not the inflated renewal price) to enable the customer to move, if they didn't want to renew, but it happened anyway.
That would improve it.
My former company sent me a renewal which was higher so I went elsewhere. The fact that it was an auto-renewal wasn't greatly obvious until I found myself with a £108 charge. Fortunately my new policy plus the charge was still cheaper than the renewal price but it was an expensive lesson to learn nonetheless.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.8K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.7K Spending & Discounts
- 245.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.8K Life & Family
- 259.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards