Car Insurance Crisis! HELP!!!

Alias_Omega

Ok, reverse it..

Ring them up asking them to show you in the terms and conditions booklet or the information they provided you that they WILL carry the insurance on without your consent..

And if they do, pay the money..

MarkyMarkD

arronc wrote: »

However in my terms and condition booklet that I got with my original insurance says nothing about them automatically renewing my insurance which the FSA say it should. Anyways forgetting that, I made a mistake I openly admit that, however I don't think I should be penalized if I could prove it was a mistake and I already have insurance, well anyway im going to make the complaint and see if it gets me anywhere, thanks for some of your advice guys, will keep you informed:beer:

The PDF version of the same booklet you have is what I've quoted from. It DOES state that they will auto-renew.

There is no general legal concept that people who make a mistake should get let off.

arronc

I understand your online booklet says that, but the booklet I have which is from may 2006 says nothing reagrding it.

CFC

The insurance companies are trying a sneaky one and pretending it's 'in everyone's best interests'.

I know for a fact that some insurers did not state this on the original documentation, but decided that this was a great wheeze so put it in the renewal offer letter. This assumes that a punter is going to thoroughly read a renewal letter, which most are not. A punter is going to just look at the renewal price and often think 'Not on your nelly, thanks!' and go elsewhere. The sneaky insurance co. is going to point them to the small print in the renewal letter then go 'ka-ching' and keep the money or in effect force them to use their 14 day canx right on the other insurer. I should not be surprised if this is starting to happen fairly frequently. A good number of years ago, they needed specific permission to set up an auto renewal, not an opt out. I shouldn't be surprised if the FSA pick up on this one sooner or later.

What a winner! They get the full premium but spread the risk between two companies.

Formally complain. Also, if you've already verbally complained but not had a response in writing, they're probably already breaking their own complaint procedures ( so many companies do this it's unbelievable) which is another black mark with the FSA. Take a look at their complaint procedures and point out to them if they've broken them. A complaint does not need to be in writing, a complaint is 'any expression of dissatisfaction' and it's clearly not been resolved. If it's not resolved we're in writing letter land with strict guidelines as to the timeframe they must comply with. (It will give all this info in the complaint procedure)

The rep you spoke to had a duty to ensure that you knew what you were buying. OK it's a bit of a grey area as to whether they needed to ensure that you understood that particular feature of the product, but the burden to ensure full understanding of the product offering, under the 'Treating Customer Fairly' principle of FSA regulation, is clearly with the insurers, and not with the punters, whether anyone likes it or not.

losgiganteskid

Since when is "silence" an "acceptance" in law ??

MarkyMarkD

arronc wrote: »

I understand your online booklet says that, but the booklet I have which is from may 2006 says nothing reagrding it.

I shall point you towards the relevant section and provide a link to the PDF on the RAC website.

It's section 10 - Payment Options and the link is here: http://www.rac.co.uk/web/insurance/car/policy/RAC052_Car_policy_FINAL_Nov_05.pdf

If you are suggesting that RAC have published a false version of their Ts & Cs on their website, then that's a very interesting suggestion!

CFC wrote: »

The insurance companies are trying a sneaky one and pretending it's 'in everyone's best interests'.

I know for a fact that some insurers did not state this on the original documentation, but decided that this was a great wheeze so put it in the renewal offer letter. This assumes that a punter is going to thoroughly read a renewal letter, which most are not. A punter is going to just look at the renewal price and often think 'Not on your nelly, thanks!' and go elsewhere. The sneaky insurance co. is going to point them to the small print in the renewal letter then go 'ka-ching' and keep the money or in effect force them to use their 14 day canx right on the other insurer. I should not be surprised if this is starting to happen fairly frequently. A good number of years ago, they needed specific permission to set up an auto renewal, not an opt out. I shouldn't be surprised if the FSA pick up on this one sooner or later.

There's no way that this is legally binding. Including such a term in the original contract, and then relying on it at renewal, is legally OK but they cannot change the terms of the contract to specify auto-renewal at the renewal stage.

losgiganteskid wrote: »

Since when is "silence" an "acceptance" in law ??

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The point isn't that you are accepting the renewal by silence; the point is that if the original contract states that the policy will auto-renew, then you have already accepted in advance that is the case. You would be changing the contract by NOT renewing and that obviously requires you to notify them of your intentions.

impy78

nadnad wrote: »

do you know what MarkyMarkD, just shush! why are you on the side of the HUGE financial institution and not on the consumer who fair enough didnt read the ENTIRE renewal document- but then it was unsolicited by him so why should he read it? he didnt ask them to send it to him they just did, many MANY people are caught out by this trick that insurance companies pull and personally I don't think its fair. I think that the insurance companies really should get some sort of definite yes or no before proceeding with a policy.

The OP is genuine in that he did not know they would continue with this - them doing so was of no benefit to him - he had his insurance elsewhere - he wasnt knowingly trying to swindle the company.

So OP make your complaint and I would bet that they will drop their request for the money in a very short space of time.

I don't think Marky Is defending/being on the side of the insurer. He knows a lot about how insurance works, and he is being truthful to the OP, and advising that the method of pleading ignorance will not work.

The best thing to do in this situation is to demand to speak to a supervisor, make a lot of noise, threaten to go to Watchdog, The FSA, the ombudsman and anyone else you can think of.

If this doesn't work, just keep on demanding to speak to a person of higher authority, and BILL THEM for your calls.

This is from my own experience of working for an insurance company, is the method that works.

If the payment has been taken from a card, you might think about claiming it back as a fraudulent payment too.

agaveworm

I would simply send proof that I was already insured at renewal (a copy of the alternative's certificate?), to Customer Services with a sensible letter explaining what has happened and RAC's certificate (if you haven't already returned it).

RAC are a decent company (I used to work for them), so this should resolve issues.

losgiganteskid

MarkyMarkD wrote: »

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The point isn't that you are accepting the renewal by silence; the point is that if the original contract states that the policy will auto-renew, then you have already accepted in advance that is the case. You would be changing the contract by NOT renewing and that obviously requires you to notify them of your intentions.

Its simple - the policyholder received a renewal INVITATION - inviting him/her to renew for a further 12 months, the policyholder remained silent and the insurer took it that meant "YES" renew. Your assumption/statement that you would "accept" in advance a renewal is nonsense as the insurer may change the terms or conditions at renewal or indeed the premium, all of which gives the policyholder the right to either decline or accept the renewal invitation.

In law it is a well known fact that for a contract you need offer, consideration and acceptance.

The auto renew route which insurers take is,as I have said before, a marketing tool for insurers to boost renewal retention. It improves renewal retention by several points where I work and any policyholder who can show they have taken alternative cover with another insurer is always "refunded" totally any premium they have duplicated. It's just a simple question of common sense - as if the policyholder thought that the renewal premium offered by his current insurer was too expensive he would hardly be inclined to want to pay another premium to a competitor and make his insurance outlay even more costly, now would he ?

nadnad

i ddint mean the renewal notice was unsolicited i meant the fact that they automatically give new insurance was unsolicited. i know all insurance companies do this - i work for one of the biggest for god's sake but my point is that i dont think its fair, and also has previously stated there has to acceptance for a contract to be binding - surely when a consumer does nothing this is not acceptance. i think that it should be a requirement that insurance companies seek a verbal or written yes or no to their renewal, the whole "dont do anything" is a sneeky way of them trapping unwitting consumers into having to stay with them.