Admiral Car Insurance - success

swallis84

Hello all,
Been using this website for a long time now, glad I can finally contribute something.
I was a customer of Admiral Car Insurance for 5 years and had been paying PPI without knowing about it.
I sent in the forms that I downloaded from here and had a response saying they would investigate my claim and get back to me within 6 weeks.
Today I got a letter from them stating the following.
"I see you accepted your policy over the telephone with Mr Smith on 7/7/05. To help investigate your claim further, I have listened to this call. While I cannot agree we have acted inappropriately, I am keen to bring matters to a close. In light of this please find enclosed a cheque for £107.21. This is the total amount paid for the PPI from 05 to 11."
I'm sure you can all read between the lines.
I know its not a fortune but just wanted to share my success and let anyone else know that Admiral are paying out.
Good luck and thanks,
Simon.

~Brock~

I am reading between the lines and my conclusion is that of course they are paying out! If they don't it will cost them £850 at FOS win or lose.

If the firm believes it has done nothing wrong (which is the case with many firms) it is hardly a fair system for them is it?

VfM4meplse

~Brock~ wrote: »

I am reading between the lines and my conclusion is that of course they are paying out! If they don't it will cost them £850 at FOS win or lose.

If the firm believes it has done nothing wrong (which is the case with many firms) it is hardly a fair system for them is it?

But in setting a precedent, doesn't it open the floodgates for similar claims?

~Brock~

VfM4meplse wrote: »

But in setting a precedent, doesn't it open the floodgates for similar claims?

Yes it probably does, however they probably don't expect that the minority that are prepared to try it on for such a trivial amount will also then go and plaster it all over the internet.

6 years worth of cover for car insurance payments against accident, sickness & redundancy, which by the sounds of it was agreed to anyway by the OP, for the equivalent of £18 per year? I probably would have bought that as well!

And then we wonder why our premiums go up every year.... :money:

dunstonh

I'm sure you can all read between the lines.

Yes. You are getting lucky. It is unlikely that this was a mis-sale. It is most likely, as Brock says, that paying out costs them £107.21 vs going to the FOS and winning (so not paying out the £107.21 to the OP) but paying £850 to the FOS.

But in setting a precedent, doesn't it open the floodgates for similar claims?

It doesnt set any precedent. It is just a failure of the complaints system in that it penalises firms that have done no wrong but suffer try-it-on complaints. It happened with endowments as well where people got paid out who shouldnt have been. If you go back further, then the person that set up the pensions review admitted years after the event that people who shouldnt have been paid got paid money.

The problem is that it is cheaper to settle in many cases. However, it then damages the reputation further as those getting paid out usually fail to realise that they are getting lucky and think the firm was at fault.

roonaldo

There isnt such thing as insurance for insurance premiums. its got to be something else.

swallis84

Just to let you know the insurance was purchased over the telephone and no I was not informed about there being PPI payments attached to the insurance.
I never asked for it either.
That is why I made the claim, had it have been sold to me properly I would have left it at that. At the end of the day the amounts are irrelevant, its letting companies know that if they dont do it properly they are going to have to pay for their mistakes.
This was not a try-it-on claim. There was no luck involved. The firm involved were at fault.
Had I have had the package sent to me in the post before agreeing to it and paying for it then yes they could have argued that I didnt read the small print. They were happy to take my money on the first phone call so it should have been pointed out at the time of calling.

dunstonh

This was not a try-it-on claim. There was no luck involved. The firm involved were at fault.

Yet they have listened to the call and found no wrong doing.

src007

dunstonh wrote: »

Yet they have listened to the call and found no wrong doing.

There is no way of telling if the sale was correct or not except by listening to the call. Do you really think they would admit to making a mistake with the sale?

I bought my car insurance this year with this very company.

An additional insurance product was offered and I clearly said no to it on the telephone. Then I was given a quote for the cost of the deal.

Luckily, I'd checked the cost online before the call and I realised I was being quoted more than I was expecting.

When I questioned the cost, the salesperson said 'sorry I must a clicked on the additional insurance box by mistake'!

swallis84

dunstonh wrote: »

Yet they have listened to the call and found no wrong doing.

And what are the chances of me getting to listen to that phone call...........

dunstonh

There is no way of telling if the sale was correct or not except by listening to the call. Do you really think they would admit to making a mistake with the sale?

As they are paying the redress then there is no reason for them to argue the point.