Compare Breakdown Cover Car Breakdown Discussion

CBC_Compare_Breakdown_Cover

rosyfred wrote: »

AVOID CBC! Have had policy for 10 months and never used it. Got a warning light (emission control) and my car slowed to about 10 miles per hour. CBC refused to come out as "my car was not immobile" and therefore not covered. They said I could upgrade at a cost of £100 and then they would come out. I appreciate warning lights can come on and go off all the time, but as the car was dangerously slow, I think they should have attended. I called a local garage and it was a broken coil, which cost less than the £100 upgrade I was quoted. DO NOT USE THESE PEOPLE!

Hi there,

Thanks for getting in touch. I'm really sorry to hear that you weren't given the breakdown assistance you needed. We'd like to try and help further with this, and find out a bit more. If you could email me directly at jeremy@eversure.com and we can hopefully try to resolve this for you.

Kind regards,

The CBC Team

Chris154

Avoid, avoid!
I had the CBC breakdown cover, which is a trading name of Eversure, and ultimately provided by a company called PEX insure. It was arranged through MSE.
They abandoned me by the side of the road. Had 'gold' cover, which included home rescue, but they just refused to pick me up. They gave wrong advice about the level of cover when phoning the helpline (and that was after almost half an hour trying to get through by the side of the motorway).
The policy was not cheap either.
I wish I had checked before - I have since seen on Trust Pilot that PEX Insure (who provide this cover) have terrible reviews and this is a common problem.
Complaints have been made, but all respondents deny responsibility and pass it around to others. A complaint to the Financial Ombudsman about PEX Insure is following
So just avoid - I'll be sticking to AA or RAC from now. May be a bit more, but actually try to help their customers.

CBC_Compare_Breakdown_Cover

Chris154 wrote: »

Avoid, avoid!
I had the CBC breakdown cover, which is a trading name of Eversure, and ultimately provided by a company called PEX insure. It was arranged through MSE.
They abandoned me by the side of the road. Had 'gold' cover, which included home rescue, but they just refused to pick me up. They gave wrong advice about the level of cover when phoning the helpline (and that was after almost half an hour trying to get through by the side of the motorway).
The policy was not cheap either.
I wish I had checked before - I have since seen on Trust Pilot that PEX Insure (who provide this cover) have terrible reviews and this is a common problem.
Complaints have been made, but all respondents deny responsibility and pass it around to others. A complaint to the Financial Ombudsman about PEX Insure is following
So just avoid - I'll be sticking to AA or RAC from now. May be a bit more, but actually try to help their customers.

Hi Chris,

Thank you for getting in touch. I'm really sorry that you had such problems with your assistance provider, we never want our customers to be put into these sorts of situations. It's worth noting that we no longer work with that assistance provider. If you could, please get in contact with our head of customer services: jeremy@evesure.com so we can work out what went wrong and if there's anything we can do.

Thanks again for leaving your comments

Kind regards,
The CBC team

MikeyQuays

Thank you vey much fo the info and discount code. I did get the 17% and did a compare prior. Paying now for full care cover incd at home and onward travel 27.00, comparison are well over £100. Great job

Thanks again

Mike

jonathantaylor999

Just used the MSE107 discount code to get a 2 person, personal cover quote of £51.97 from the Compare Breakdown Cover website, including Home Start, Onward travel and National Recovery.
Autoaid refused to price match (their price has shot up from £43.31 last year to £59.99 renewal quote) so I guess my 10 year loyalty means nothing... Oh well, their loss... :-)

[Deleted User]

Thank-you to the posters above who highlighted their experiences with CBC cover when they were refused help on the basis that their vehicles were not "immobile". I contacted CBC to ask what the situation is. I'm presenting what I asked and their response (after confirming with them this was OK). I have no connection with them (other than having just purchased cover) and (obviously?) cannot verify what they have said, but I thought it may be of use to someone.

Me - "At least a couple of the negative comments in the thread are about experiences with car’s which were not recovered because they were not technically “immobile”. I see in your definition of Breakdown in the policy wording that this would appear to still be the case.

I wonder whether the actual position is different? For example, I would have thought it would be reasonable to add to this definition “or unsafe to continue to drive or likely to lead to damage/further damage to the vehicle if driven.”

I’d quite like to try your European cover but don’t fancy being stuck in limp home mode or running on two cylinders one day on rainy French motorway and told that no one’s going to help."

CBC response - "Until November we worked with an underwriter and assistance provider who had this in their policy wording and adhered to the exclusion quite strictly. As the broker for the policy, even if we felt that in particular circumstances, it would have been fair to provide assistance, we held no claim authority.

We now work with an assistance provider called National Breakdown. In this wording, that exclusion is not present. Under the term ‘Breakdown’ in the definitions, it is described as:

Breakdown - An electrical or mechanical failure, lack of fuel, misfuelling, flat battery, or puncture to the vehicle, which immediately renders the vehicle immobilised.

Having spoken to the assistance provider, they have assured me that under similar circumstances to those that led to complaints (such as sudden loss of power or warning lights that tell someone to stop the engine) they would provide assistance. It is important to be clear on the distinction between a vehicle that suddenly breaks down, and one that clearly has a fault that the driver decides to drive anyway."

Whilst I don't think the policy wording fully removes the risk that help could be declined and would prefer to see some clarification (along the lines I indicated), I am reassured by their response (at least enough to give it a try).

Stuart

RFloyd

It's early days, but I've just tried renewing my breakdown cover on my 10 year old car. Even without the MSE discount, the prices were about half that of my renewal quote. It was easy to get a price and to review the offers too. Of course, the real test is how things go if/when the service is ever needed, so I'll update as and when that arises.

JulesAtCumbria

In terms of navigating the site, it was easy-peasy and quickly came back with 7 quotes, 6 of which undercut my current renewal price, the cheapest by less than half the quoted amount! I checked out the proposed breakdown insurer through online reviews - surprisingly complimentary. With the MSE-blagged discount I've got a year's cover dead cheap - thanks team!

aguy187

Just got a quote and checking the policy wording, situations where the car can be driven even when it shouldn't be are still not covered:

Breakdown / Broken Down

...The illumination of any of the Vehicle’s warning lights does not constitute a Breakdown. In this instance, You need to make Your way to a place of repair, and any Breakdown cover within this Membership will not apply

MallorcaMike

I received Autoaid's renewal quote this year £59.99 up from £43.31, as did jonathontaylor999 above. A 38.5% increase after several years, and having never claimed. As every single quote via the MSE compare thingy is less than this, I can't see how MSE can continue to punt Autoaid.