Assurant premium hike.

letitcomedown

I have no idea what the outcome would be. If you read the FSA document, it's obvious Assurant have made a complete hash of this and are really trying it on.

What makes me particularly angry is they have made absolutely no comment on the "Key Facts" declaration that the premiums were fixed.

Personally I would be happy with a refund of all premiums to date, or of forcing them to keep the premiums at the originally agreed level. If I had known the premiums would increase based on economic conditions, I would have self-insured...

MattE

If they do give notice to terminate agreement - I presume they will try and give 30 days notice. But this would seem unfair - as most alternative insureres have a 90 day exclusion period. Do you think the FSA document implies that a 30 day notice period would be unfair? I think 120 days would be ok, i.e., 30 days to find alternative + 90 days to cover exclusion period.

TechnoBoy

I cancelled Assurant once they doubled the premiums - and they have, without any prompting from me, refunded all my premiums (two months worth) + a bit of interest.

Anyone else get anything back?

Dick_here

TechnoBoy wrote: »

I cancelled Assurant once they doubled the premiums - and they have, without any prompting from me, refunded all my premiums (two months worth) + a bit of interest.

Anyone else get anything back?

I didn't try to get anything back. I simply cancelled on principle once the premium shot up without warning. If enough people did that they'd have to think again.

TechnoBoy

I'd done nothing though ... just cancelled after 2 months back in the summer of 2008 :T

I guess kudos to whoever is responsible for this ...

Dick_here

TechnoBoy wrote: »

I'd done nothing though ... just cancelled after 2 months back in the summer of 2008 :T

You'd only paid for first two months when they tried to jack up the premiums ? Shocking. Mine had been going for a year or so.

dunstonh

Remember that the plan did have reviewable premiums. Its always a risk with the dirt cheap ones that they are going to do this at some point. If you were cynical you could say that it was a ploy. Get people in cheap and when you put the price up then maybe you lose 30% but keep the rest

JimmyTheWig

dunstonh wrote: »

Remember that the plan did have reviewable premiums. Its always a risk with the dirt cheap ones that they are going to do this at some point. If you were cynical you could say that it was a ploy. Get people in cheap and when you put the price up then maybe you lose 30% but keep the rest

Surely that is fairly standard to have reviewable premiums?

dunstonh

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

Surely that is fairly standard to have reviewable premiums?

Most do but there are a few exceptions. However, those that have actually amended their premiums have been the ones that were cheapest at some point.

JimmyTheWig

But it does make it very difficult for a lay-person to make a choice. You could go for someone cheap and they put their prices up. You could go for someone expensive and they put their prices up. You could go for someone cheap and they leave their prices the same. You could go for someone expensive and they leave their prices the same.
This reminds me of some sort of game theory. There's a matrix that looks like this. Can't remember what it is called right now.
My point is that it seems logical to always go for the cheapest, unless you can quantify the probability of any one company putting their prices up. Hmmm.