Big hammer, little nut.

stugib

colbee wrote: »

Furthermore, the original 'contract' was for one year's insurance and did not give the building society carte blanche to presume a contract to infinity.

You haven't mentioned who it was AFAICS but I did a little digging because this is something that didn't sound right to me either, but just as an example Nationwide's T&Cs say: "Your policy is an annual contract. It will automatically be renewed on the renewal date unless you tell us not to" and I'd suspect most others say the same.

However, whilst I can see the convenience in not having to arrange payment every year, I do think threatening you with debt collectors if you didn't pay the renewal is ludicrously over-the-top. At that point they have provided no service to you for the following 12 months as you pay in advance, so I see no reason why they couldn't just cancel the policy if they couldn't take payment.

Butlers1982

as of 9/8/07 no relationship will exist between my mother-in-law and the building society/insurance company

Only if the policy holder cancels the premium.
Which she hasnt, so the policy continues

rosysparkle

All insurance companies of which I'm aware will automatically renew if the policyholder doesn't cancel, and this will be in the T&C to which you have to agree to take out insurance.

It seems to me that the insurance company have acted perfectly properly in this case, albeit that explaining that if the policy isn't cancelled by the policyholder then the unpaid premium may be pursued by a DCA can't have been nice to hear. Since debt recovery action is a consequence of not cancelling and not paying, they might suggest that they were explaining the worst case if the policyholder didn't cancel.

I don't really think you have a legitimate gripe against the insco, they are following the T&C to which you agreed, and adhering to the DPA.

Since you have until 09/08/07 before renewal, you could write a letter for your MIL to sign, instructing the insco to lapse the policy from renewal and not to take further premiums.

Optimist

I think you need to set up an enduring power of attorney (EPA) this will enable you to officially look after your mother-in-laws affairs. You either need a solicitor or can do it with the forms available on

http://www.guardianship.gov.uk/formsdocuments/publications.htm

Do it before October if your going to as things change then and get more expensive

melancholly

rosysparkle wrote: »

I don't really think you have a legitimate gripe against the insco, they are following the T&C to which you agreed, and adhering to the DPA.

i think that the way they handled it is pretty bad though - why not just explain why they can't do it rather than saying do it or we'll send in the debt collectors to your ill mother?! i guess it's not the company policy that's at fault, just the unhelpful person on the phone!

colbee

Butlers1982 wrote: »

Only if the policy holder cancels the premium.
Which she hasnt, so the policy continues

What don't you understand about this: (From the building society) 'Your insurance runs out on 9 August 2007' ?

Rex_Mundi

I look after my nans financial (bills, bank, legal) affairs for her. We haven't got to any stage of me having (or wanting) to take power of attorney because she still has a good head on her. It's only that she does not fully understand all the ins and outs of signing up, or dealing with different companies. So I deal with these for her.

The easiest thing here (and what I always do) is type out a cancellation letter (or whatever type of letter is needed), and get her to sign it. This has always been good enough for us in the past (been working for a few years for us), and I can't see it going wrong for you.

From what it seems here. The insurance company have acted both within their own T&Cs regarding the contract (it was in the small print when you signed up), and within the Data Protection Act (under this act, only the person that signed up to the contract can cancel it...........it is there for the protection of all of us even though in this case it's an obstruction for you acting in the best interest of your MIL).

I could fully recommend reading T&Cs fully before signing up for anything in the future. So many people skip reading these properly, and end up with grief when they try to cancel or change any services/agreements they make. .

peter_the_piper

Rex_Mundi wrote: »

I look after my nans financial (bills, bank, legal) affairs for her. We haven't got to any stage of me having (or wanting) to take power of attorney because she still has a good head on her. It's only that she does not fully understand all the ins and outs of signing up, or dealing with different companies. So I deal with these for her.

.

I think that you really should consider getting her to arrange a power of attorney as its often difficult to do so when its really needed, just file it away for later. We've had to do this in the past for the OH's nan but we hadn't realised she had alzheimers and it was very confusing and upsetting for her to do it then. Make sure the rest of the family are happy first though, relations can get quite strained otherwise.

colbee

Al_Mac wrote: »

colbee, what you seem to be failing to realise is that when the policy was taken out, it was taken on an automatic renewal. The policy lasts for one year, expires and is automatically renewed. Unless the policyholder cancels it.

Lots of people have tried to explain this.

Obviously this isn't the answer that you want.

Sorry.

I do understand what you are saying and I do understand the 'automatic' issue. I also understand about the various Powers of Attorney. But this is the Vent board where one is supposed to be able to sound off about whatever, including obdurate bureaucracy.
Yes, I am having a gripe but I did not seek to make an official complaint about someone who was simply doing their job, rather it was about the attitude that led to the threat of taking a 91 years old woman to court. Some subscribers to this thread have puzzlingly translated what I said into something quite different.
I was not seeking advice (there are more appropriate boards on this forum), which is not to say I am ungrateful for any proffered.
My intention was to draw attention to the kafkaesque situation wherein an elderly woman, who in truth has absolutely no knowledge of any aspect of what has gone on, can be threatened with court.
Anyway, the matter is now resolved. My wife sounds a lot like her mother.
So, many thanks to all those who gave good advice, and commiserations to any who had a problem understanding Inglish as she is writ.:T

uktim29

colbee wrote: »

Yes, I am having a gripe but I did not seek to make an official complaint about someone who was simply doing their job, rather it was about the attitude that led to the threat of taking a 91 years old woman to court.

That is still doing his job. He's just telling you what happens so you can do something to prevent it. Would you prefere people not to tell you things and lie to you instead?