AdBlock Warning

Parts of this website do not function properly with AdBlock enabled on your device. To get the best user experience on our website, please disable Adblock for this website (domain) on your browser.


Malc

Mid Stream Change Of Address And Insurers Rip-Off

Recommended Posts

Well here we are guys and gals .... the definitive response .... it seems that I am NOT entitled to an explanation !!!!

Is this a natural process do you think, that entitlement to explanations are not a part of normal business ethics !!!

Any views please ?

Thanks

Malc

" Mr M

Our Reference:

Dear Mr


I write further to your e-mail sent earlier today.

Regrettably, I am unable
to provide you with any information as to how our
premiums
are calculated
due to the business sensitive information that this would
contain.

In
order for me to be able to review your concerns again I would need to be
in
receipt of
additional information not provided to me in the original
complaint.
Unfortunately,
having read your letter there does not appear
to be any new information for
me to
investigate.

Therefore our
final decision letter of 10th June 2013, will need to stand
and although I
can
appreciate that this will not be the decision that you would wish
to
receive, I hope that I
have been able to clarify this
matter.

Yours sincerely "


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

As I said before Malc, moving house can alter your premium both up and down. Saga,s website states this and gives things such as changing your journey to work for example as contributory factors. Have you found similar increases with other insurers when they are given exactly the same details as Saga? I don't think that they do have to give you full details as to why your premium is increased, merely the fact that they or their underwriters consider it to be a greater risk than previously which would be based on the criteria which they use. All insurers have different criteria which is why quotes not only vary but also why some will insure certain risks whilst others either decline to quote or quote prohibitive prices.

I would not be happy in your situation but if you look at it the other way round.....ie if you were moving from your new postcode to your old postcode I very much doubt that you would be complaining that they had reduced your premium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just an old sceptic BUT I feel that even if I moved back to my old address they would find a good enough reason to increase the premium yet again and tell me that they just will NOT give an explanation as to why !

Unethical and obfuscation comes to mind ..................... anywhichway ......... the customer is destined and programmed to LOSE

Malc

Thank you for your further thoughts btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe I'm just an old sceptic BUT I feel that even if I moved back to my old address they would find a good enough reason to increase the premium yet again and tell me that they just will NOT give an explanation as to why !

Unethical and obfuscation comes to mind ..................... anywhichway ......... the customer is destined and programmed to LOSE

Malc

Thank you for your further thoughts btw.

Computer says "NO"

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well here we are guys and gals .... the definitive response .... it seems that I am NOT entitled to an explanation !!!!

Is this a natural process do you think, that entitlement to explanations are not a part of normal business ethics !!!

Any views please ?

Thanks

Malc

" Mr M

Our Reference:

Dear Mr

I write further to your e-mail sent earlier today.

Regrettably, I am unable

to provide you with any information as to how our

premiums

are calculated

due to the business sensitive information that this would

contain.

In

order for me to be able to review your concerns again I would need to be

in

receipt of

additional information not provided to me in the original

complaint.

Unfortunately,

having read your letter there does not appear

to be any new information for

me to

investigate.

Therefore our

final decision letter of 10th June 2013, will need to stand

and although I

can

appreciate that this will not be the decision that you would wish

to

receive, I hope that I

have been able to clarify this

matter.

Yours sincerely "

Send them a SAR (Subject Access Request) + a cheque for £10 THen by law they have to provide you with everything & I mean everything they have on you. They do get 40 days from receipt of your request but they shouldn't use this period as a guideline for responding but should comply sooner rather than later

Your letter should be as follows:

Dear Sir

For the avoidance of all doubt, this is a SAR (subject access request.)

Pursuant to the Data Protection Act 1998 ("the Act") TAKE NOTICE I require you to provide me with all documents both external and internal, telephone scripts, screen shots, notes etc which appertain to myself and my dealings with you

Enclosed is the statutory maximum fee of £10 required to cover all expenses you may incur.

You have a maximum of 40 days to comply with my request but should you fail to comply you will be reported to the ICO.

I look forward to your advices at your earliest convenience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone ................... it would seem that even doing the SAR they will not give me the useful detail I need ...................... does anyone know if this is within the rules ???

Thanks.

Malc

Dear Mr

I write further to your e-mail of 1st August, the content
of which has been
noted.

Should you wish to pursue your request for
a Subject Data Access Request,
you will have
to write to the Data
Protection officer and enclose a cheque for ten
pounds. You can
contact
them at the following address:

The Data Protection Officer.
Enbrook
Park
Sandgate
Folkestone
Kent
CT20 3SE

Whilst I the above
request, I must advise that a Subject Data Access
Request
will not

include the commercially sensitive information that you have
previously
requested.

Furthermore, I have also noted your comments about
your intention to
approach the
Financial Ombudsman Service and we will
await to hear from them regarding
your
complaint.

Yours
sincerely

END

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all surprised by that reply. If your Lexus dealer was charging you £80/hr labour and you moved and were being charged £100/hr labour by your new dealer, who might be part of the same franchise, would you be demanding to know the ins and outs of the reason they were charging more? The cost of various things varies depending on location and I really can't see why you feel so aggrieved. Insurance is based on PERCEIVED RISK and if your insurer feels from their database info that your new postcode gives them a higher risk factor then they are within their rights to increase your premium accordingly in the same way as they will decrease your premium if your details change and they consider the new details to present a lower risk.

If you still want to escalate your complaint then you would be advised to contact the Ombudsman for advice by initially phoning them on 0800 023 4567

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all surprised by that reply. If your Lexus dealer was charging you £80/hr labour and you moved and were being charged £100/hr labour by your new dealer, who might be part of the same franchise, would you be demanding to know the ins and outs of the reason they were charging more? The cost of various things varies depending on location and I really can't see why you feel so aggrieved. Insurance is based on PERCEIVED RISK and if your insurer feels from their database info that your new postcode gives them a higher risk factor then they are within their rights to increase your premium accordingly in the same way as they will decrease your premium if your details change and they consider the new details to present a lower risk.

If you still want to escalate your complaint then you would be advised to contact the Ombudsman for advice by initially phoning them on 0800 023 4567

This is really interesting, cant wait to see the final outcome. Don't let them grind you down. Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my problem is that my old postcode compared to my new postcode revealed just one more crime in the reporting period . from the police database that a LOC member kindly gave on here.

My original premium was say @£480 and the increase in premium for the remaining 10 month period was @£141.

Totally disproportionate in my view and as I am totally unable, at this time, to get a reasoned argument from Saga as to why the disproportionate increase in premium came about I do actually want some real, simple, honest proof or reasoning rather than just feeling totally ripped-off.

If Saga was able to give anything by way of a reasonable explanation then I might be happier BUT just to say the information is sensitive and whatever is totally a wind-up in my view and obfuscating the reality of the matter.

Secrecy seems to abound and probably needs ripping apart in these modern times of transparency !

Malc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think my problem is that my old postcode compared to my new postcode revealed just one more crime in the reporting period . from the police database that a LOC member kindly gave on here.

My original premium was say @£480 and the increase in premium for the remaining 10 month period was @£141.

Totally disproportionate in my view and as I am totally unable, at this time, to get a reasoned argument from Saga as to why the disproportionate increase in premium came about I do actually want some real, simple, honest proof or reasoning rather than just feeling totally ripped-off.

If Saga was able to give anything by way of a reasonable explanation then I might be happier BUT just to say the information is sensitive and whatever is totally a wind-up in my view and obfuscating the reality of the matter.

Secrecy seems to abound and probably needs ripping apart in these modern times of transparency !

Malc

The thing is Mike that the "1 extra crime" is per say 1000 population and does NOT include motor accident/personal injury(ie whiplash for example) claim figures which vary from area to area and are not on the database which you checked so the database is a little pointless for motor insurance purposes.

I now live on a very quiet back lane in a village but people living 300 metres away, on the A52 but still in the village, are classified as presenting a higher risk factor and pay more accordingly.

I really think that for your own peace of mind you should initially phone the Ombudsman service for advice on the Freephone number which I put in my last post on this thread. All it will cost is a little more of your time. Saga don't appear concerned about you approaching the Ombudsman which may be a clue as to what view the Ombudsman is likely to take but for the sake of a free phone call you have nothing to lose.

Whilst you may feel my replies are a little negative, they are my honest opinion of your predicament and the likely outcome........I would be delighted to be proved wrong and see you get the result you want.

Regards Dave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave, thank you.

I suppose the disingenuous " sensitivities " statement is what winds me up most .............. if as you think the issues are simply those which you're thinking they might be then why on earth is Saga and it's Underwriters simply not being up-front and telling me ......... what on earth is so " sensitive " about that I wonder.

There just has to be some other nefarious reasoning behind their obfuscation, a Want to cloud transparency, cloak and dagger stuff ...... if not then why on earth not be up-front about it all I wonder.

Time to ponder and probably make that call !!! :unsure:

Malc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DB DOES include ALL incidents. Its a major part of the insurance industries fight against fraudulent claims "Crash for Cash"

Also a supplier cannot increase the cost of their service WITHOUT justifying it If they do its unlawful as its a 'penalty'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone ................... it would seem that even doing the SAR they will not give me the useful detail I need ...................... does anyone know if this is within the rules ???

Thanks.

Malc

Dear Mr

I write further to your e-mail of 1st August, the content

of which has been

noted.

Should you wish to pursue your request for

a Subject Data Access Request,

you will have

to write to the Data

Protection officer and enclose a cheque for ten

pounds. You can

contact

them at the following address:

The Data Protection Officer.

Enbrook

Park

Sandgate

Folkestone

Kent

CT20 3SE

Whilst I the above

request, I must advise that a Subject Data Access

Request will not

include the commercially sensitive information that you have

previously

requested.

Furthermore, I have also noted your comments about

your intention to

approach the

Financial Ombudsman Service and we will

await to hear from them regarding

your

complaint.

Yours

sincerely

END

NO they have to give you everything particularly that info that has caused them to increase your premium and their reason for it

I'll post a response pointing out amongst otherthings that the 40 day time limit started the day they became aware of your SAR & not when you send it to their data controller. by the by way they are ALL data controllers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perceived Risk has to have some basis on fact......such as why is there an increased risk? It can't be based just on increasing profit & if it is they should NOT try to claim your an increased risk Remember that in future you may be asked the question "have you had your insurance increased or refused for any reason" & your answer will cost you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DB DOES include ALL incidents. Its a major part of the insurance industries fight against fraudulent claims "Crash for Cash"

Also a supplier cannot increase the cost of their service WITHOUT justifying it If they do its unlawful as its a 'penalty'

Whilst I hate to dispute the accuracy of any of your comments I feel you may be confused over various databases. The database referred to earlier by another member was the CRIME database. The only vehicle related incidents on this database covers theft of vehicles and theft from vehicles. It contains no information on accident statistics whatsoever.

Incidentally, do your utility suppliers give you FULL details and reasons when they increase their charges to you, if so it would be interesting to see their reasons and not just that wholesale costs have risen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone ................... it would seem that even doing the SAR they will not give me the useful detail I need ...................... does anyone know if this is within the rules ???

Thanks.

Malc

NO they have to give you everything particularly that info that has caused them to increase your premium and their reason for it

I'll post a response pointing out amongst otherthings that the 40 day time limit started the day they became aware of your SAR & not when you send it to their data controller. by the by way they are ALL data controllers

Sorry but again your info is incorrect Jon. The 40 days commences from the time that they receive your SAR and payment of the fee.

The reply from SAGA does not say to send it to their "data controller" but to their Data Protection Officer and very helpfully gives the full address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple as it may seem, get a new quote and threaten to cancel, if the new quote is cheaper, you should have grounds to cancel and change provider with no recompense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I didn't realise this thread had 4 more pages . . ignore my post, Lexmaniac seems to have this under control . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you guys ................ this is probably really just the tip of the iceberg that encompasses Insurance Company rip-off procedures against the buying public.

Maybe this is something that whomsoever is trying to get to the bottom of Car Insurance premium rip-offs should like to use as a case study and to pursue !

Does anyone know what that body might be ? is there anyone professional here with the thought and the skills to take this on board on a " pro bono " basis I wonder ????

Just a thought guys. :arrrggg-matey:

Malc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi everyone ................... it would seem that even doing the SAR they will not give me the useful detail I need ...................... does anyone know if this is within the rules ???

Thanks.

Malc

NO they have to give you everything particularly that info that has caused them to increase your premium and their reason for it

I'll post a response pointing out amongst otherthings that the 40 day time limit started the day they became aware of your SAR & not when you send it to their data controller. by the by way they are ALL data controllers

Sorry but again your info is incorrect Jon. The 40 days commences from the time that they receive your SAR and payment of the fee.

The reply from SAGA does not say to send it to their "data controller" but to their Data Protection Officer and very helpfully gives the full address.

Data 'Protection' officer is their made up name. The correct name is data controller AND as they all process personal data they are ALL data controllers. The time of receipt is deemed to be no more than 5 days after posting forwarding it to anothet office does not increase the 40 days.

Also could you explain your comment that my "info is incorrect again"

To clarify being aware means in receipt of the SAR. The only Data Protection Officer that I know of works for the ICO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DB DOES include ALL incidents. Its a major part of the insurance industries fight against fraudulent claims "Crash for Cash"

Also a supplier cannot increase the cost of their service WITHOUT justifying it If they do its unlawful as its a 'penalty'

Whilst I hate to dispute the accuracy of any of your comments I feel you may be confused over various databases. The database referred to earlier by another member was the CRIME database. The only vehicle related incidents on this database covers theft of vehicles and theft from vehicles. It contains no information on accident statistics whatsoever.

Incidentally, do your utility suppliers give you FULL details and reasons when they increase their charges to you, if so it would be interesting to see their reasons and not just that wholesale costs have risen.

If I require my utility supplier to justify any increase than I can. Problem is in recent years most consumers haven't done soce & the utilitiy companies know this hence also even the reluctance to change suppliers. However there's nothing to stop consumers challenging these firms particularly as the current regulator is a much good as a chocolate teapot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is, as outlined in the link I posted, the organisation who are the data controllers. The link also says to ensure you send your request to the correct person. Each organisation has a specific dept./person to deal with issues such as SAR. At SAGA they have called this person the Data Protection Officer. It is also very clearly stated that the 40 days starts from receipt of fee and not, as you stated previously, when they first become aware of the fact that you may indeed require a SAR.

My comment regarding your info being incorrect would be more obvious to you had you responded to my posts in the order they were posted but to clarify, it was regarding the crime statistics database referred to earlier which you have either misunderstood the database referred to or have never checked the info on that particular database ( I notice that you neither disputed this or accepted that you were incorrect in your response which is in your last post.)

Getting into a slanging match with you is not helpful to Malc but I do feel that any info given should be accurate which is why I posted the link to the official website regarding SAR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify being aware means in receipt of the SAR. The only Data Protection Officer that I know of works for the ICO

Just as a matter of interest, the ICO hold annual conferences for Data Protection Officers. The 2012 conference was attended by over 500 Data Protection Officers from various organisations.......check the ICO website Jon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now