MSE News: Insurance renewal charges under investigation by FCA

nobbysn*ts

dunstonh wrote: »

That is not the purpose of the FOS and you cannot complain direct to FOS anyway.

Not the purpose maybe, but you can complain directly, even if the most they'll do is log it against the company, or tell you where to complain if it's false advertising, or maybe even fraud.

dunstonh

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

Not the purpose maybe, but you can complain directly, even if the most they'll do is log it against the company, or tell you where to complain if it's false advertising, or maybe even fraud.

If you go direct to FOS, they will write their interpretation down of your complaint and forward it on to the company. Adds to the delay and you may not get the complaint viewed as you intended as their interpretation and what you actually want to complain about may be two different things. Anyone that has spent time dealing with complaints will tell you that you get some weird interpretations that way. Better to go direct to company.

It is not fraud and its not false advertising. So, they wont stick. They dont need to name the companies until you engage them in their services.

nobbysn*ts

dunstonh wrote: »

If you go direct to FOS, they will write their interpretation down of your complaint and forward it on to the company. Adds to the delay and you may not get the complaint viewed as you intended as their interpretation and what you actually want to complain about may be two different things. Anyone that has spent time dealing with complaints will tell you that you get some weird interpretations that way. Better to go direct to company.

It is not fraud and its not false advertising. So, they wont stick. They dont need to name the companies until you engage them in their services.

They are offering the 'cheapest' insurance, solely in an attempt to gain your custom. The figures are supplied to enable you to see how their price compares to other quotes you would obtain if you chose to shop around. If the figures are real, that is fine, and they can prove their advertising is indeed above board. If they are a creative manipulation, they can indeed, and certainly should be held to account, by all the laws that stop every other company lying to obtain business. it's a common complaint in advertising, and insurers are not above the law in this area.

dunstonh

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

They are offering the 'cheapest' insurance, solely in an attempt to gain your custom. The figures are supplied to enable you to see how their price compares to other quotes you would obtain if you chose to shop around. If the figures are real, that is fine, and they can prove their advertising is indeed above board. If they are a creative manipulation, they can indeed, and certainly should be held to account, by all the laws that stop every other company lying to obtain business. it's a common complaint in advertising, and insurers are not above the law in this area.

The only problem with all that is that plenty of people will take them up on their alternatives. If we were seeing posts saying that the figures on the alternatives were not being honoured then absolutely there is a case to answer.

However, complaining about them mis-selling when they havent even gone through the "sales" process is crazy in my opinion.

I have submitted a financial crime notification today. Not for the first time this year. I see many things going wrong or I do not agree with. Yet the resources are not there to deal with those areas. So forgive me if I find these sorts of silly complaints a waste of energy and resources. People are losing their pension pots to unregulated scams or their savings to cold calling overseas property or bio fuel rubbish. A complaint that would effectively be " I dont believe them but I havent engaged them or asked them to supply information" just doesnt seem sensible to me.

nobbysn*ts

dunstonh wrote: »

The only problem with all that is that plenty of people will take them up on their alternatives. If we were seeing posts saying that the figures on the alternatives were not being honoured then absolutely there is a case to answer.

However, complaining about them mis-selling when they havent even gone through the "sales" process is crazy in my opinion.

I have submitted a financial crime notification today. Not for the first time this year. I see many things going wrong or I do not agree with. Yet the resources are not there to deal with those areas. So forgive me if I find these sorts of silly complaints a waste of energy and resources. People are losing their pension pots to unregulated scams or their savings to cold calling overseas property or bio fuel rubbish. A complaint that would effectively be " I dont believe them but I havent engaged them or asked them to supply information" just doesnt seem sensible to me.

And that's why the industry gets away with it. It's only a little crime, so it doesn't matter. It does to the millions that get scammed by it.

dunstonh

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

And that's why the industry gets away with it. It's only a little crime, so it doesn't matter. It does to the millions that get scammed by it.

How can it be a crime when there is no wrong doing?

rs65

DianeRan wrote: »

Just had a letter from my current insurance company with a renewal cost for home contents insurance that is double compared to what I paid last year and to what I've been quoted elsewhere for the same cover!

Can you clarify who this is?

If it is a broker/intermediary then they are doing nothing wrong as you may expect them to check prices.

If it is an insurer then they are arguably using a sales technique but if the figures are wrong then it is misleading. If that's the case and it is widespread then the FCA might be interested.

Regardless, its not mis-selling (which is a widely misused term these days).

nobbysn*ts

dunstonh wrote: »

How can it be a crime when there is no wrong doing?

When there is clear wrong doing, as in this case.

dunstonh

nobbysn*ts wrote: »

When there is clear wrong doing, as in this case.

How is it wrong in this case?