'I put the wrong date when getting a comparison quote... and my EXISTING insurer hiked my premium'

paddyandstumpy

I'm out. I can't be bothered to pick apart yet another rambling diatribe.

Put your tin foil hat back on.

peterbaker

paddyandstumpy wrote: »

I'm out. I can't be bothered to pick apart yet another rambling diatribe.

Put your tin foil hat back on.

Anyone might think that even though you profess to work in insurance, you do not consider yourself to be in the risk business - you certainly don't seem to recognise risk, or maybe you just don't want the public at large to be alerted to it, or start thinking about it in rambles in their own minds?

JuicyJesus

eddddy wrote: »

I think this is valid and important information - and I have used 'dummy' quotes in the past to find this out.

For example, it's important to understand that the true cost of getting a speeding ticket is much more than £100 and 3 points.

As my kids passed their tests, I added them as named drivers on my insurance. I used comparison sites to indicate to them what would happen on renewal, if they got speeding tickets etc.

Similarly, if I got a speeding ticket, I might add/remove it on a comparison site to find out how much my stupidity had cost me.

That's not an intended use of the comparison sites, they don't warrant to provide this service and as far as they're concerned if you're putting that information into them it's because you are quoting for insurance on those terms and warranting that those facts are correct.

Obviously if you're not using your own details, they can't stop you and it won't cause that many issues. However anyone doing so using their own details is playing with fire.

rudekid48

peterbaker wrote: »

Anyone might think that even though you profess to work in insurance, you do not consider yourself to be in the risk business - you certainly don't seem to recognise risk, or maybe you just don't want the public at large to be alerted to it, or start thinking about it in rambles in their own minds?

The reason he's ducking out is that you do not take on board any information that you are given, just re-adjust your rant.

It's clear that you have no understanding of how comparison sites work - either technically or commercially - and so there is little point anyone engaging with you any further as if an answer doesn't conform with any of your conspiracy theories then you just ignore.

Ask yourself one thing - why is it that all of the comparison sites make a tidy profit and very, very few insurers that write motor business do?

peterbaker

JuicyJesus wrote: »

That's not an intended use of the comparison sites, they don't warrant to provide this service and as far as they're concerned if you're putting that information into them it's because you are quoting for insurance on those terms and warranting that those facts are correct.

Obviously if you're not using your own details, they can't stop you and it won't cause that many issues. However anyone doing so using their own details is playing with fire.

Oh so if you are (using your own details) like most unsuspecting <idiot customers> would - using a mindset inferred from your posts, or the mindsets of ValiantSin and paddyandstumpy who liberally sprinkle their Thanks on your pronouncements, then as a dumb customer, you deserve to be well and truly stuffed, is that it?

ViolaLass

ValiantSon wrote: »

No, it isn't unimaginative. The task described is pointless. It is not the same as seeing how much insurance would be on two different cars that you are considering buying. There are some speculative options that could materially affect cost and can legitimately be avoided, and then there are some which are unavoidable statements of fact; having convictions is an unavoidable statement of fact.

I've done it.

I got a speeding ticket years ago and wondered how much effect it was still having on my insurance so I ran searches with and without it.

I wasn't trying to hide the info from anyone, just see whether it was still making a difference.

ValiantSon

peterbaker wrote: »

Oh so if you are (using your own details) like most unsuspecting <idiot customers> would - using a mindset inferred from your posts, or the mindsets of ValiantSin and paddyandstumpy who liberally sprinkle their Thanks on your pronouncements, then as a dumb customer, you deserve to be well and truly stuffed, is that it?

Get over it, Peter. Not everyone agrees with you, and some of what you have written is demonstrably wrong.

peterbaker

rudekid48 wrote: »

Ask yourself one thing - why is it that all of the comparison sites make a tidy profit and very, very few insurers that write motor business do?

Ah, the money god thing - silly me - I must have overlooked that, eh? In some mindsets (far too many for my liking) it rules supreme, doesn't it? So, your question, rudekid48 - would that be from the same box of stupid questions as:- why is it that all of the major !!!!!! sites make a tidy profit, and very, very few of the sex-workers involved do?

Are we then being encouraged by the warning in the MSE article that visiting insurance comparison websites involves many of the same risks as visiting !!!!!! sites, i.e. if you use identifiable real names, addresses or email and card detail, your personal data can be used against you in damaging ways by pimps or worse?

rudekid48

peterbaker wrote: »

Ah, the money god thing - silly me - I must have overlooked that, eh? In some mindsets (far too many for my liking) it rules supreme, doesn't it? So, your question, rudekid48 - would that be from the same box of stupid questions as:- why is it that all of the major !!!!!! sites make a tidy profit, and very, very few of the sex-workers involved do?

Are we then being encouraged by the warning in the MSE article that visiting insurance comparison websites involves many of the same risks as visiting !!!!!! sites, i.e. if you use identifiable real names, addresses or email and card detail, your personal data can be used against you in damaging ways by pimps or worse?

More irrelevance.

No point continuing.

VT82

When you buy insurance, it's reasonable to assume that the warnings about 'you must ensure the data you submit is accurate' only applies for the quote on which you end up clicking 'purchase now', not all the way through the quote process. Fishing for quotes should be fine and safe. MSE's guidance about trying out lots of job titles shows that they think this is a fair way to go about getting a quote too.


Fact is, back in the day, the MSE editorial position would have been to EXPLODE at the fact that people were being adversely affected by inaccurate/best guess data being entered onto comparison websites at the 'request for quotation' stage to see what impact it has, but then 'abandoning their basket' before finalising their quote by confirming the purchase. It would have been a big anti-consumer issue for them. Heck, when it comes to credit cards, they even went so far as to build their own 'eligibility calculator' tool so you could get 'quotes' without being adversely affected.


The fact that MSE, rather than exploding about this, have just said 'be careful what you put into comparison websites', is a sad reflection of how they have changed since being bought out by... a comparison website! I really thought this wouldn't happen, and am equally surprised that more people aren't shocked at the flat out dodginess of the underlying story.