sent a bill for an imaginary speeding ticket from insurance

Johno100

AdrianC wrote: »

<blink> Are you serious?

And what do you think the whole point of that comparison site is, apart from to make it simpler and faster to give the details to A WIDE RANGE OF INSURERS AT ONCE?

The point is to enquire with insurers via an aggregator, like browsing several shops at once, not a data mining exercise for insurers to be used against you at a later date.

If I find a policy on a comparison site and click 'take me to the insurer's website' that is the point where I have to confirm the details provided earlier which populates the insurers on screen application and then have to tick the 'information provided is correct' box. That is the point I contract with the insurer with that information.

AdrianC

Johno100 wrote: »

The point is to enquire with insurers via an aggregator, like browsing several shops at once, not a data mining exercise for insurers to be used against you at a later date.

The aggregator don't generate the quotes. The insurers do that, and pass them back for display. And, to do that, the comparison site has to pass the details TO THE INSURER, right?

So, then, the insurer have your details. You've told the comparison site that's OK. You've told them it's OK for the insurer to retain your details for later, internal purposes.

Insurers compare details across the industry.

None of this should be news.

If I find a policy on a comparison site and click 'take me to the insurer's website' that is the point where I have to confirm the details provided earlier

Correct.

which populates the insurers on screen application... That is the point I contract with the insurer with that information.

Wrong. You agree to provide the insurers with your details at the very point you first sign on to the comparison site. Read the small print you agreed to, and think about the processes required to generate the quotes. You don't really think that the meerkats have the full commercially-sensitive actuarial tables and price-generation tools of each and every insurer, do you?

nidO

AdrianC wrote: »

Wrong. You agree to provide the insurers with your details at the very point you first sign on to the comparison site. Read the small print you agreed to, and think about the processes required to generate the quotes. You don't really think that the meerkats have the full commercially-sensitive actuarial tables and price-generation tools of each and every insurer, do you?

If we're going to be specific here, the meerkats' website actually states that your sensitive personal information, specifically referring to medical and conviction history, will be passed to insurers only for the purposes of providing a quote, therefore explicitly stating that it won't be used for any other purpose, such as your insurer using the information as grounds to adjust an existing contract.

Marktheshark

Start the official complaint procedure in writing by certified post.
The sooner this is done, the easier things will be.

AdrianC

nidO wrote: »

If we're going to be specific here, the meerkats' website actually states that your sensitive personal information, specifically referring to medical and conviction history, will be passed to insurers only for the purposes of providing a quote, therefore explicitly stating that it won't be used for any other purpose, such as your insurer using the information as grounds to adjust an existing contract.

It also says...
"We will use the information provided to us by you to search the websites of our partners in order to obtain the best quotes available to you."

Marktheshark

A subject access request as well and see if the data they admit to holding matches up with what they have used to your detriment.
Then if it does not, a complaint to the information commissioner about miss use of (mined) data.
I believe the penalties are quite eye watering for illegally acting on mined data.

AdrianC

Marktheshark wrote: »

A subject access request as well and see if the data they admit to holding matches up with what they have used to your detriment.
Then if it does not, a complaint to the information commissioner about miss use of (mined) data.

Umm, perhaps you forgot that he explicitly gave them that information for precisely that purpose?

Marktheshark

AdrianC wrote: »

Umm, perhaps you forgot that he explicitly gave them that information for precisely that purpose?

You have the exact wording of that contract you refer to ?
Would like to read it if you have it on hand.

Might have a better idea or answer after reading it.

nidO

AdrianC wrote: »

It also says...
"We will use the information provided to us by you to search the websites of our partners in order to obtain the best quotes available to you."

So? On the subject of providing your information to insurers it also also says:

We may use third parties to process personal information on our behalf. Where third parties process your personal information on our behalf, we will ensure that they have the necessary high standards of security in place so that your data is kept secure and only used in accordance with this Privacy Policy.

This privacy policy being the one that states that conviction info will be used for no purpose other than providing a quote.

From a data protection standpoint the fault would therefore be comparethemarket (assuming this is the aggregator the OP actually used) for providing sensitive data to a third party for use other than that outlined in their privacy policy.

That doesn't change the fact though that your "this shouldn't be news to you" response isn't helpful, when as reading through the aggregator's privacy policy carefully it is clear that the OP's information should explicitly not have been used for the purpose that it was.

Marktheshark

I would SAR them, I bet they don't admit to mining and holding the data from the site.
They could be in very hot water here.
I can not see the DPA missing the chance to grab up to £500,000

The ICO ask you go straight to them if you suspect miss-use of data