Forgotten phone insurance since 2004...

tsb88

Hi,

I've just been going through some things with my Dad and realised he has been paying for lifeline mobile phone insurance from the carphone warehouse for an old phone since 2004 (!)

It's been coming out every quarter for £12.50 a time, and as he has been going through a lot the last few years which I don't want to get into, it was just forgotten about.

It will of course be cancelled now, but I'm wondering if there is any chance of trying to get some kind of rebate back from them. The phone in question is a Motorola V500 (remember those?), and funnily enough actually still works fine, and the insurance has never been claimed on.

My thoughts are that there is nothing to lose trying, but from their point of view we've been paying for a service. The most ridiculous thing is that you can buy the phone on ebay for less than the price of one of the quarterly payments!!

The other thing is that the reason it came to light is that they sent a letter about an update to their terms and conditions. Before that, they hadn't sent any letters or notification (that I'm aware). I would have expected some kind of annual letter at least.

Any advice? Realise it's a bit of a weird one :undecided

Iain_L

I hate to say it but I think you have to accept the money is gone. Your dad was paying for the insurance and simply never needed to use it.

As for an annual letter, there would have been no reason for them to send one unless the T&Cs changed, which is what they did.

Iain

Techhead_2

I agree with Iain, just because he hasn't needed to claim on it doesn't mean you are entitled to a refund. He has had the benefit of the insurance being there.

Given that dad seems to have been through a period where he didn't check his bank account. It's also possible other correspondence went unnoticed.

Bingolingo

tsb88 wrote: »

Hi,

I've just been going through some things with my Dad and realised he has been paying for lifeline mobile phone insurance from the carphone warehouse for an old phone since 2004 (!)

It's been coming out every quarter for £12.50 a time, and as he has been going through a lot the last few years which I don't want to get into, it was just forgotten about.

It will of course be cancelled now, but I'm wondering if there is any chance of trying to get some kind of rebate back from them. The phone in question is a Motorola V500 (remember those?), and funnily enough actually still works fine, and the insurance has never been claimed on.

My thoughts are that there is nothing to lose trying, but from their point of view we've been paying for a service. The most ridiculous thing is that you can buy the phone on ebay for less than the price of one of the quarterly payments!!

The other thing is that the reason it came to light is that they sent a letter about an update to their terms and conditions. Before that, they hadn't sent any letters or notification (that I'm aware). I would have expected some kind of annual letter at least.

Any advice? Realise it's a bit of a weird one :undecided

Yes, complain on the grounds that auto renewal, or to exist indefinitely, for a mobile policy is ridiculous and unfair to the customer. If they say no then ask to take the complaint further. I'd suggest saying that quarterly payments are harder to spot and the lack of communication from cpw makes it easier to forget about these things.

The way it works now is that policies can auto renew up to 5 years only. I'd be looking for £200 back minimum but try for £300. There's no right to a refund but you have a chance of getting something back so go for it.

NFH

In another recent thread, someone was offered an immediate refund for a similar mobile phone insurance policy that had continued for many years. There might be industry guidelines or even legislation on this. If I were you, ask for a refund and if they won't give it, ask the Financial Ombudsman Service for advice.

grumbler

Unfair contract springs to mind when company keeps charging £50 p.a. for a phone that costs next to zero to replace.

Small claims court - if they refuse to refund at least 5 years, possibly with some interest on the top.

NFH

grumbler wrote: »

Unfair contract springs to mind when company keeps charging £50 p.a. for a phone that costs next to zero to replace.

Good thinking, but unfortunately Regulation 6(2)(b) of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 states "In so far as it is in plain intelligible language, the assessment of fairness of a term shall not relate to the adequacy of the price or remuneration, as against the goods or services supplied in exchange". Basically the regulations don't cover the price of the goods or services.

I would be more inclined to go after the lack of renewal notices or something along those lines. I'd be surprised if there aren't any industry guidelines on this.

gjchester

tsb88 wrote: »

The phone in question is a Motorola V500 (remember those?), and funnily enough actually still works fine, and the insurance has never been claimed on.

If it's never been claimed for and the phone still working how would the insurance firm know the insurance is no longer wanted?

grumbler wrote: »

Unfair contract springs to mind when company keeps charging £50 p.a. for a phone that costs next to zero to replace.

Not sure that's relevant.

Car insurance for young drivers often cost more than the car, Insurance is not about cost it's about piece of mind that you've mitigated a risk. The OP's father was going through a rough time, it may be he was happy to pay the costs rather than have something else to think about.

NFH wrote: »

I would be more inclined to go after the lack of renewal notices or something along those lines.

Again the phone is working and in use, other than the fact the insurance offers very poor value now nothing has changed. The phone is still in use and insured against loss or damage. The only issue is the poor value for money, but that's not really any grounds to complain.

I guess the only place to look is the original policy certificate (if it can be found) to see if it was a set length or a monthly rolling contract. If it's a rolling contract then there's not a lot to go on, its down to the OP's father to contact them to cancel the insurance

grumbler

gjchester wrote: »

...
Car insurance for young drivers often cost more than the car, Insurance is not about cost it's about piece of mind that you've mitigated a risk. ...

I accept NFH's comment above, but you are saying rubbish.
Car insurance is sky high only because of virtually unlimited possible liabilities to a third party in the first place. That's why voluntary excess has almost no effect on the cost of insurance and that's why Third Pary Fire and Theft Only costs are often the same (or even more sometimes) than Comprehensive.
And that's why you can have a phone without insurance, but can't drive a car without it.

NFH

gjchester wrote: »

If it's never been claimed for and the phone still working how would the insurance firm know the insurance is no longer wanted?

If there has been no communication in either direction for many years between the insurer and the insured, then the insurer should reasonably be expected to ask whether the policy is continuing to cover a genuine risk. It is unreasonable for the insurer to fail to communicate with the insured for many years but to continue collecting premiums.

gjchester wrote: »

Again the phone is working and in use

Who said it is still in use?

anotheruser

It surprises me people don't know:

1) What they are paying for when signing up.
2) What each portion of money leaving their account is for.