Overpayment of wages

Bitstring , from the wonderful person Adrian said

Churchill certainly do it, unless you tell them not to. They have, at least, (and maybe it is related to going to CCA?) stopped charging the renewal from the point at which you phone them, rather than when it is actually due (3-4 weeks later sometimes).

Yep, did that to me, and as I paid by phone I most certainly did not consent.

tim

Did you register an objection with any appropriate body or authority?

I "consented without knowing"...? Well, that's a new one on me.

I did not even almost tick the box on last year's proposal form. Churchill had no mandate from me, written or verbal, and where the operator subsequently confirmed this.

Initially, while queuing for an operator, I was played a pre-recorded message. During its content Churchill advised me that they share information with other agencies for the prevention of fraud. It seems they may do it without consequence though.

I only found out when I came to (not) renew last month, and as I am in the middle of moving this is not high on my list of things to do.

tim

Don't know if it makes a difference paying monthly by DD but Churchill send you the renewal details /cert and if you want to renew you simply do nothing and they carry on taking the DD ..adjusted for increase/reduction in cost... Stuart

Car Insurance Renewal not high on your list of things to do ????

I'm not sure whether it amounts to fraud, but these companies certainly seem to be trying to generate repeat business based upon subterfuge and customer inertia.

I faced a similar situation with Direct Line who, upon renewing my car insurance in 2006, sent me a letter with the new certificate in which was buried a comment in the middle of the 3rd paragraph congratulating me for agreeing to "automatic renewals" in the future; their description of what was obviously a CCA on my credit card. It was lucky that I read through the whole of the letter accompanying the new certificate.

Since I had not given any such consent when I renewed the policy, I 'phoned Direct Line immediately to query the "automatic renewal option". Their agent tried to explain that perhaps I had not understood the "benefits" of their scheme. When I pointed unequivocally that I had given no such consent nor would I do so, he had to consult with his supervisor. I told them that I wanted to cancel the insurance with immediate effect for a full refund of my premium unless they agreed not to implement a CCA on my credit card. They did agree eventually.

I do have to say that Direct Line kept their word because the renewal letter in 2007 noted that I did not have an automatic renewal option and that I would have to 'phone them in order to renew. That was just as well since they had increased the premium by 15% and I found a policy with another company some 20% cheaper.

I *think* that Direct Line is wholly owned by RBS, and that perhaps Churchill is also owned by the same bank? Perhaps, also, trying to set up a CCA through tricks is a sign that they are about to increase the premium substantially.

Adrian posted

What is the actual formal process for this? I mean, suppose when the time comes, my insurance company debits my card claiming a CCA, and I dispute it - what evidence would they have to produce to try and show that I did agree to it? For example, would their evidence have to include the phrase "continuous credit card authority"?

Had this with Direct Line - funny thing was it was my mother's car insurance policy that I paid (as a one off) the previous year that they then tried to renew the following year.

Personally I always try and setup a DDR as I can sure its dead when I kill it and if I cant then I specifically state during the course of the call (or in writing thereafter) that I do NOT consent to a continuing authority.

Regards

Why? Have you had a bad year from a claims point of view?

Not necessary. My Direct Line house premium has just gone up 20% and I haven't made a claim since 2004.

No claim, same car, same address, same garaging, same conditions as the previous year. I guess they just wanted to increase their revenue.

And what is the relevance of that to motor insurance?

It was a serious question.

Why I asked was that you said: "trying to set up a CCA through tricks is a sign that they are about to increase the premium substantially.", which I interpreted as "Whilst I don't know what the renewal premium will be..." "trying to set up a CCA through tricks is a sign that they are about to increase the premium substantially."

Have they?

(...and yes, they are owned by RBS)

This is what they did last year.

This year, they tried to auto renew.

tim

AIH, as part of the move (abroad) I disposed of the car and wanted the insurance to lapse. So I had to make a call that I otherwise wouldn't have had to make, and there's no point complaining to the tubby about this.

(a second) AIH, I was asked before the call if I wanted to help them with a quality survey. I declined because I had taken part in one before and they are pointless. All they are is "was the individual who served you polite/knowledgable/something else" There are no "are you happy with what the *company* did questions" which are the ones that I always want to give the low marks.

tim

They make a loss on new business. They only make a profit by bumping up the cost in the second, third, fourth ... year

tim

The short answer is, "Yes they did".

Apologies - I had tried to make clear in an earlier paragraph that they had attempted to set up a CCA surreptitiously in 2006. The next year (2007) they did increase the premium by some 15% without any change in circumstances. I took my business elsewhere. My suspicion about their motive arises from the action that they did take.