Swinton Rip off Nightmare

JuicyJesus

vaio wrote: »

As you know fees like this need to be in the T&C and be fair (in the FOS sense)

I suppose Guido thinks it's outrageous because as Swinton can sell, deal with proposal, set up policy, send documentation, deal with renewal and pay any claims for a whole year for £67 and still make a profit on the deal then charging £50 for cancelling must be way more than actual cost.

I'm inclined to say he does have a point

The whole reason they can do that for £67 is because the cost is driven down by other servicing being an added extra which incurs extra administration charges.

It's about as outrageous as Lidl not packing your bags for you and having pretty displays for their fruit and veg like Waitrose do.

vaio

JuicyJesus wrote: »

The whole reason they can do that for £67 is because the cost is driven down by other servicing being an added extra which incurs extra administration charges.

It's about as outrageous as Lidl not packing your bags for you and having pretty displays for their fruit and veg like Waitrose do.

maybe or maybe £67 is an accurate reflection of the total costs of providing the policy and the £50 cancellation fee is unfair profiteering from a captive punter

rs65

Swinton are a broker as far as I am aware so probably made about £15 out of the £67.

So £15 to set it up and £50 to cancel it.

If there was a return premium on cancellation, some of the £15 probably had to go back to insurers.

JuicyJesus

vaio wrote: »

maybe or maybe £67 is an accurate reflection of the total costs of providing the policy and the £50 cancellation fee is unfair profiteering from a captive punter

And Lidl's prices are an accurate reflection of the total costs of providing supermarket shopping and Waitrose's higher prices are unfair profiteering.

Either way, it's in their terms and if you take out the policy you agree to those terms. There are plenty of car insurance firms around, if you want one with implicit charging rather than explicit then you can get that, it'll just cost most people a lot more overall. Most cheap insurance companies are only cheap because they restrict services in some way or make others more expensive.

vaio

JuicyJesus wrote: »

And Lidl's prices are an accurate reflection of the total costs of providing supermarket shopping and Waitrose's higher prices are unfair profiteering.

Either way, it's in their terms and if you take out the policy you agree to those terms. There are plenty of car insurance firms around, if you want one with implicit charging rather than explicit then you can get that, it'll just cost most people a lot more overall. Most cheap insurance companies are only cheap because they restrict services in some way or make others more expensive.

Yep, but waitrose don't try and charge you £50 if you decide to stop buying from them.

As above, it might be in their T&C but still has to pass the FOS fairness test and I be interested in seeing a justification for a £50 cancellation fee on a £67 policy

prestonisidore

As far as I know, there are some people making this kind of bad attitude. I think the best thing you do is try to analyze first if the insurance company are license to avoid you swindler

dunstonh

Yep, but waitrose don't try and charge you £50 if you decide to stop buying from them.

Nor do Swinton. You buy the product through them and if you dont wish to buy again next year they charge nothing.

As above, it might be in their T&C but still has to pass the FOS fairness test and I be interested in seeing a justification for a £50 cancellation fee on a £67 policy

In the era of explicit charging, it doesn't matter if the premium is £10 or £1000. An explicit charge is an explicit charge.