Sheila's Wheels demanded full payment

mrcactus

I took out car insurance with Sheila's Wheels a few months ago as they were the cheapest from a comparison site. Great customer dashboard, easy to use and easy to add three family members as named drivers on my car.

Two months ago I didn't have money in the account to pay the DD so they took it a few days later. This month I was paid late so again there was no money in the account to cover the DD. Few days later I get a letter saying the DD feature has been cancelled and I am to pay the remaining balance on the policy by the end of the month or the monies will be transferred to debt collection agency.

I callled them up and after 40 mins I finally got through. The guy did say that if a DD fails twice then the policy has to be paid in full (remaining months payments). 

Now I know it's probably in the T's & C's of the agreement, which I obviously didn't read and I have broken the agreement so I am not denying that it is my fault. Had to pay almost £300 to avoid the situation getting worse.

This is just a heads up to make sure you have the money in your account for your car insurance    

I guess I had it in my head that like most other DD's they will just try again in a few days...oh how I was wrong. Well, at least I'm insured until the middle of next year and don't have to worry about the payments coming out.

shiraz99

When you choose to pay monthly by DD you're taking out a credit agreement, it's effectively a loan. By missing two payments you're defaulting on that agreement so they have every right to demand the remainder of the premium in full. This may even adversely affect your credit history.

mrcactus

shiraz99 said:

When you choose to pay monthly by DD you're taking out a credit agreement, it's effectively a loan. By missing two payments you're defaulting on that agreement so they have every right to demand the remainder of the premium in full. This may even adversely affect your credit history.

Yep, my own silly fault. The 1st payment I was late on they took a few days later. The 2nd one I missed due to being paid late, I assumed they would do the same again.

My credit rating already horrific so will be nothing new there   

ontheroad1970

What I hate about these arrangement, are that insurance companies will act as debt and judge jury and high executioner.  They cancel the insurance altogether without ensuring that you are demonstrably aware - eg a special delivery letter - not an email as many people use secondary email addresses to prevent spam in their main account - that cover has been cancelled.  This then leads to you getting stopped for having no insurance, something that is impossible to defend as it's an absolute offence - though can be (with difficulty) argued to be significant reasons not to endorse.  

Driving without insurance is a nasty endorsement that can stop you from being able to hire cars from mainstream hire companies.  

Emmia

ontheroad1970 said:

What I hate about these arrangement, are that insurance companies will act as debt and judge jury and high executioner.  They cancel the insurance altogether without ensuring that you are demonstrably aware - eg a special delivery letter - not an email as many people use secondary email addresses to prevent spam in their main account - that cover has been cancelled.  This then leads to you getting stopped for having no insurance, something that is impossible to defend as it's an absolute offence - though can be (with difficulty) argued to be significant reasons not to endorse.  

Driving without insurance is a nasty endorsement that can stop you from being able to hire cars from mainstream hire companies.  

From the insurers perspective, if your payment fails you are not holding up your side of the contract - they however are, and would be on.the hook for paying out if you had an accident in the period before they're able to collect the payment. 

Statistically (and I'm not suggesting you do this yoursef) it's probably likely that people who fail to pay their DD also fail to maintain their car/vehicle properly (the MOT is only good on the day it's done). Things like dodgy tyres, brakes and general poor maintenance can increase the likelihood of having an accident/making a claim.

They gave you a grace period the first time, but I can completely understand this not being the case the second - if it were, people would take out insurance, opt for monthly DDs, make the first payment and then simply not pay the rest - you'd be effectively insured at a hefty discount. 

If they notified you of the cancellation by special delivery, that is more expensive than an email... cynically, you could also refuse the letter / fail to be in to receive it, again extending insurance cover without cost.

HampshireH

From their perspective once is a mistake but twice is the start of a pattern of behaviour.

The policy protects them from non payment. 

400ixl

ontheroad1970 said:

What I hate about these arrangement, are that insurance companies will act as debt and judge jury and high executioner.  They cancel the insurance altogether without ensuring that you are demonstrably aware - eg a special delivery letter - not an email as many people use secondary email addresses to prevent spam in their main account - that cover has been cancelled.  This then leads to you getting stopped for having no insurance, something that is impossible to defend as it's an absolute offence - though can be (with difficulty) argued to be significant reasons not to endorse.  

Driving without insurance is a nasty endorsement that can stop you from being able to hire cars from mainstream hire companies.  

You agreed to what email address you used and the communication method. If you don't maintain the monitoring of that email address then that is not their fault. And using a secondary email address is not excuse, you set that method up. Personally I sue a different email address for every company I engage with, all comes into the same interface so no excuse to be missing anything.

That is as bad as making excuses for people who move and don't bother updating their correspondence address with companies they deal with in that way, or their V5 or driving license.

The OP clearly understands the fault lies at the user end and has posted this to remind others there can be consequences. Luckily they were in a position to be able to pay it in full, some may not be without real issues.

Jumblebumble

400ixl said:

ontheroad1970 said:

What I hate about these arrangement, are that insurance companies will act as debt and judge jury and high executioner.  They cancel the insurance altogether without ensuring that you are demonstrably aware - eg a special delivery letter - not an email as many people use secondary email addresses to prevent spam in their main account - that cover has been cancelled.  This then leads to you getting stopped for having no insurance, something that is impossible to defend as it's an absolute offence - though can be (with difficulty) argued to be significant reasons not to endorse.  

Driving without insurance is a nasty endorsement that can stop you from being able to hire cars from mainstream hire companies.  

You agreed to what email address you used and the communication method. If you don't maintain the monitoring of that email address then that is not their fault. And using a secondary email address is not excuse, you set that method up. Personally I sue a different email address for every company I engage with, all comes into the same interface so no excuse to be missing anything.

That is as bad as making excuses for people who move and don't bother updating their correspondence address with companies they deal with in that way, or their V5 or driving license.

The OP clearly understands the fault lies at the user end and has posted this to remind others there can be consequences. Luckily they were in a position to be able to pay it in full, some may not be without real issues.

You clearly do know not much about email systems if you assume that they are 100% reliable.
There is no reason whatsoever why insurance companies could not send a letter and I agree with @ontheroad1970
The ABI should in my view mandate that insurance companies do so as the consequences of failing to receive a single email are lifelong which is ridiculous.

ontheroad1970

Emmia said:

ontheroad1970 said:

What I hate about these arrangement, are that insurance companies will act as debt and judge jury and high executioner.  They cancel the insurance altogether without ensuring that you are demonstrably aware - eg a special delivery letter - not an email as many people use secondary email addresses to prevent spam in their main account - that cover has been cancelled.  This then leads to you getting stopped for having no insurance, something that is impossible to defend as it's an absolute offence - though can be (with difficulty) argued to be significant reasons not to endorse.  

Driving without insurance is a nasty endorsement that can stop you from being able to hire cars from mainstream hire companies.  

From the insurers perspective, if your payment fails you are not holding up your side of the contract - they however are, and would be on.the hook for paying out if you had an accident in the period before they're able to collect the payment. 

Statistically (and I'm not suggesting you do this yoursef) it's probably likely that people who fail to pay their DD also fail to maintain their car/vehicle properly (the MOT is only good on the day it's done). Things like dodgy tyres, brakes and general poor maintenance can increase the likelihood of having an accident/making a claim.

They gave you a grace period the first time, but I can completely understand this not being the case the second - if it were, people would take out insurance, opt for monthly DDs, make the first payment and then simply not pay the rest - you'd be effectively insured at a hefty discount. 

If they notified you of the cancellation by special delivery, that is more expensive than an email... cynically, you could also refuse the letter / fail to be in to receive it, again extending insurance cover without cost.

My point is they are either selling you a product or a loan.  It's like the Buy as you View method but applies to all policies.  we all know how poor value Buy as you View was.  You are paying repayments on a loan for a product, not paying monthly for insurance.  That's the reason they get to charge the interest they do.  When you take out a loan to pay for something, that thing is paid for.  

Emmia

ontheroad1970 said:

Emmia said:

ontheroad1970 said:

What I hate about these arrangement, are that insurance companies will act as debt and judge jury and high executioner.  They cancel the insurance altogether without ensuring that you are demonstrably aware - eg a special delivery letter - not an email as many people use secondary email addresses to prevent spam in their main account - that cover has been cancelled.  This then leads to you getting stopped for having no insurance, something that is impossible to defend as it's an absolute offence - though can be (with difficulty) argued to be significant reasons not to endorse.  

Driving without insurance is a nasty endorsement that can stop you from being able to hire cars from mainstream hire companies.  

From the insurers perspective, if your payment fails you are not holding up your side of the contract - they however are, and would be on.the hook for paying out if you had an accident in the period before they're able to collect the payment. 

Statistically (and I'm not suggesting you do this yoursef) it's probably likely that people who fail to pay their DD also fail to maintain their car/vehicle properly (the MOT is only good on the day it's done). Things like dodgy tyres, brakes and general poor maintenance can increase the likelihood of having an accident/making a claim.

They gave you a grace period the first time, but I can completely understand this not being the case the second - if it were, people would take out insurance, opt for monthly DDs, make the first payment and then simply not pay the rest - you'd be effectively insured at a hefty discount. 

If they notified you of the cancellation by special delivery, that is more expensive than an email... cynically, you could also refuse the letter / fail to be in to receive it, again extending insurance cover without cost.

My point is they are either selling you a product or a loan.  It's like the Buy as you View method but applies to all policies.  we all know how poor value Buy as you View was.  You are paying repayments on a loan for a product, not paying monthly for insurance.  That's the reason they get to charge the interest they do.  When you take out a loan to pay for something, that thing is paid for.  

Aren't they giving you a loan, specifically to buy their product?

By not making the payments on time, you've broken the terms of the "loan" agreement so they can demand payment in full - much like the bank can if they find you breaking the terms of your mortgage.

Indout96

You clearly do know not much about email systems if you assume that they are 100% reliable.

There is no reason whatsoever why insurance companies could not send a letter and I agree with @ontheroad1970
The ABI should in my view mandate that insurance companies do so as the consequences of failing to receive a single email are lifelong which is ridiculous.

But you must be aware that you have not paid the bill for the last two months so why would they need to inform you at all that they were going to cancel, you haven't paid them