Complaint to Ombudsman re. Autorenewal = A Sharp Practice

lisyloo

The way it's accepted it's ok to debit a third party, because at sometime in the past the insurer got hold of the card details.

Are you guys 100% sure about this?
I understood it operated under CCA - continuous card authority, so authority had been given for payments to be taken on a continuous basis (like for magazine subscriptions etc.).
If you have given this authority then it's not unauthorised.

meer53

The insurance company would have been given your card details for your original insurance payment, they notify you that the renewal is automatic. So the payments aren't unauthorised.

Whats the problem with calling them when they send the renewal and letting them know you want to cancel ? It's simple really, but only if you actually read the renewal documents, instead of ignoring them as you don't like their new quote.

mikey72

lisyloo wrote: »

Are you guys 100% sure about this?
I understood it operated under CCA - continuous card authority, so authority had been given for payments to be taken on a continuous basis (like for magazine subscriptions etc.).
If you have given this authority then it's not unauthorised.

I'd be interested to see how you think a third party could have given authority for a continuous payment, and what they have signed (electronically) to agree to it, and how it has been accepted under what terms and conditions.

Whenever I've done it for my daughter, all paperwork is in her name, and the agreements are all with her.
I make a one off payment, authorised by me giving them the security number off the back, as I would with any single puchase.
And as the insurer asks if the card is owned by the policyholder or a third party, and what the name on the card is, I would be inclined to think even they think it makes a difference.

I don't ever give them permission to keep my details, including my card number, and if they do, I would be interested to know why you think they actually have a right to, yet alone charge it again a year later without informing me, and based on them not having a third party actively tell them not to?

mikey72

meer53 wrote: »

The insurance company would have been given your card details for your original insurance payment, they notify you that the renewal is automatic. So the payments aren't unauthorised.

Whats the problem with calling them when they send the renewal and letting them know you want to cancel ? It's simple really, but only if you actually read the renewal documents, instead of ignoring them as you don't like their new quote.

Specifically a third party card in lisyloos quote above, not your own card.

Bangton

mikey72 wrote: »

I'd be interested to see how you think a third party could have given authority for a continuous payment, and what they have signed (electronically) to agree to it, and how it has been accepted under what terms and conditions.

Whenever I've done it for my daughter, all paperwork is in her name, and the agreements are all with her.
I make a one off payment, authorised by me giving them the security number off the back, as I would with any single puchase.
And as the insurer asks if the card is owned by the policyholder or a third party, and what the name on the card is, I would be inclined to think even they think it makes a difference.

I don't ever give them permission to keep my details, including my card number, and if they do, I would be interested to know why you think they actually have a right to, yet alone charge it again a year later without informing me, and based on them not having a third party actively tell them not to?

It's a different situation if it's a third party's card rather than the policyholders. Assuming the insurer is aware the card belongs to a third party, they wouldn't be able to offer an auto renewal where the PH is not paying for their own insurance (for obvious reasons). If they have done this a complaint should be made with the insurer and it is definately wrong

CKhalvashi

dransfield wrote: »

I just sent this complaint and wondered if anyone else shares my fury about this sharp practice:-

Dear Ombudsman,
In short:-
Last year I insured my car with Elephant.co.uk.
This year their renewal premium was approximately 30% higher, and so did not renew with them.
I used price comparison websites, and insured with Privilege Insurance for a reasonable price.

I happen to contact Elephant (for proof of NCB) and was alarmed to find that they had automatically renewed me! I then became exasperated as the Cust Serv Rep explained this was for my own good! This is simply “sharp practice”. I can think of no other single purchase where it would be considered acceptable to recharge the customer without their express permission. How about if I book some cinema tickets on a Friday? – Should the cinema, by default, book some more tickets for the following Friday? Or what about that Villa I stayed in last summer? - Should the owners charge my card for the coming summer just in case? …etc…

The legal requirement for a motor vehicle to have 3rd party cover for road use (which was one of the CSR’s justifications) is my responsibility, not that of any insurance company who I may have had cover with. Or are they going to pop around and get it MOTed for me as well?
If (hypothetically) this were a valid argument, then:-
• They would only need to put me on 3rd party cover, and
• they would need to confirm that my particulars had not changed, otherwise the insurance could be invalid anyway.

Happily, in my case, Elephant have, in their words: agreed to refund the premium and waive any cancellation charges, or in my words: agreed to return the money that they stole from my credit card.

However, I am moved to lodge a formal complaint against this practice within the industry.
Yours sincerely,
[Dransfield]

We’ve been with the same insurer for several years, and even though we’re on auto-renewal, I still have the cheek to phone up 4 times a year asking them to beat the cheapest we’ve found by 1p. It works, and instead of ignoring the letters, give it a go.

Your complaint is baseless, as it was YOU that decided not to read the paperwork properly and it was YOU that decided not to act upon the information therein contained. I don’t just throw something that involves a contract I happily involved myself in, I store it for 6 years and hope that I’ll never need to use it again.

CK

System

Bangton wrote: »

It's a different situation if it's a third party's card rather than the policyholders. Assuming the insurer is aware the card belongs to a third party, they wouldn't be able to offer an auto renewal where the PH is not paying for their own insurance (for obvious reasons). If they have done this a complaint should be made with the insurer and it is definately wrong

When I used my card to pay for my daughter's insurance it stated quite explicitly that the card used would be used in any insurance renewal. TBH there are enough warnings about this. In my case on initially taking out the insurance and no doubt it will also be on the renewal that they will use the details held to renew.

mikey72

!!!!!! wrote: »

When I used my card to pay for my daughter's insurance it stated quite explicitly that the card used would be used in any insurance renewal. TBH there are enough warnings about this. In my case on initially taking out the insurance and no doubt it will also be on the renewal that they will use the details held to renew.

That contract is between the insurance company and the insured. No where did you sign it, or agree to that.

You entered your details on the payment screen.

You won't get a copy of the renewal either, the policy holder will get that.

I'm certainly not paying my daughters insurance for the next 60 years.

dunstonh

smoker99 wrote: »

So what's your excuse?

Were you too lazy or too stupid to read the newbie alert underneath the OP's username, you know, those parts about giving "new posters a chance" and being "especially nice".

Welcome to the forum dransfield.

There is no newbie alert under the persons username.

mikey72

Er, yes there is.