Stuart21UK Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 Just so you know really...its all for the good of the consumer (so what I am about to doesn't detract from my belief of that fact) but it astounds me that other industries dont follow suit i.e. your local Tesco's being forced to suggest you consider 'shopping around' and maybe trying Sainsbiry's or Lidl for a change, perhaps the local restaurant recommending you try the KFC around the corner for a cheaper bite eat etc! The FCA have set out a number of requirements with the aim of increasing transparency and engagement at renewal. These new rules are intended to address concerns about levels of consumer engagement at policy renewal, improve the treatment of existing consumers by firms; and promote effective competition in the market. This requirement will take effect on policies invited for renewal on or after the 1st April 2017.A summary of the changes are to: disclose last year's premium at each renewal, so that it can be easily compared to the new premium offered encourage consumers to check their cover and shop around for the best deal at each renewal, and identify consumers who have renewed four, or more, consecutive times, and give these consumers an additional prescribed message encouraging them to shop around. This includes consumers who renew after 1 April 2017 who may have already renewed four or more times before these rules come into force. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Purdie Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 Nanny state cr*p. Hacks me off that that the days of the numpties subsidising those who are on the ball and have an ounce of common sense may soon be numbered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patt Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 Ohh and you have to ASK to be removed from automatic renewal too !! For all you readers out there, else they will charge you an admin fee to tell the to fek orvf without THEIR specific notice period.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Joseph Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 Thanks for the reminder, @boxsternoob56. IMHO, 2 and 3 above definitely fall into the "nanny state" category. 1, however, is genuinely helpful and will save me rummaging through my files to check what the prior year's premium was (if I can't remember, although I usually can). Both our motor policies (with Saga) are due for renewal in the next couple of months, so I look forward to seeing the renewal notices. P.S. I'm not averse to paying a sensible increase in premium, nor am I desperate to get the absolutely lowest premium. I just don't like it when they take the p*ss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topradio Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I took out a financial product a few years ago and on the paperwork it said how much my 'adviser' would be earning from the contract. I must say that I'm glad that I don't have to disclose how much profit I'm making when I do a job Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart21UK Posted March 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 40 minutes ago, topradio said: I took out a financial product a few years ago and on the paperwork it said how much my 'adviser' would be earning from the contract. I must say that I'm glad that I don't have to disclose how much profit I'm making when I do a job insurance is not a mandatory disclosure whereas mortgage is fully disclosable but you are correct...when you go to the local newsagent he doesn't HAVE to disclose how much he makes on a packet of polo's...*I know we are talking a vast difference in amounts but you dont get your local sparkie or builder disclosing profits on each job either) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topradio Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I agree, it does seem odd that only the financial services sector has to disclose this info. It wouldn't surprise me if other professions are forced in the future to do so also. They will never make the legal profession reveal its margins though as most MP's seem to have a second occupation in that sector. I often say that the first lesson at lawyer school must be 'advanced invoice raising' followed by 'double procrastination' and I'm not joking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araf Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 The playing field is getting levelled on a commercial basis though. More contracts are being awarded on an 'open book' policy, where full costs and profits are disclosed. Ltd companies still post their accounts at Companies House too, which does show profitability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topradio Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 Only large companies have to disclose full accounts. Smaller ones (like mine) don't have to (fortunately) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patt Posted March 22, 2017 Report Share Posted March 22, 2017 I write such a clause into all my supplier agreements. The suppliers that really want to deal and grow with me are happy with it, those that complain, usually don't last too long. I have an ethical responsibility to ensure the supply chain has not been bought, and also ensure the vendor is stable enough to sustain my business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart21UK Posted March 23, 2017 Author Report Share Posted March 23, 2017 On 3/21/2017 at 10:18 PM, topradio said: Only large companies have to disclose full accounts. Smaller ones (like mine) don't have to (fortunately) correct we only provide abbreviated accounts to Co House too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glyn Posted April 1, 2017 Report Share Posted April 1, 2017 Number one proposal - that's a great idea and it will allow you to identify the sneaky antics of the insurance industry when they raise premiums by the back door. I refer specifically to the misleading rhetoric intended to dupe the policy holder into thinking the company are protecting them - an example - TV adverts for car insurance where they tell you you don't loose your no claims bonus if your car is damaged by an uninsured driver - and of course you don't loose it or get it reduced - but the sneaky gits don't tell you that they increase your premium before applying the NCB because of that claim. The insurance industry is corrupt and has been allowed to ignore laws in statute and do this with impunity because no one with authority is prepared to challenge them, Its also a fact that there is little choice - sure there are plenty of names to choose from - but track back as to who owns what and they come down to just a few people or organisations, Admiral, that's also Bell, Elephant, Diamond, Able, Confused.com, compare.com, Admiral Law, BDE Law - the Law firms were acquired because the government made it illegal for insurance companies to sell claim details to ambulance chasers - they made £18000000 in 2011 doing this, so they bought and created their own law firms so they can continue in house - hence you still get the calls regarding "have you been in an accident" I could list so many more but you get the picture. The statuted laws they ignore - The all singing all dancing Equalities Act 2010, The law states you cannot discriminate on certain protected characteristics - s3x, Age, marital status - but insurance has dispensation to ignore these factors - I can see the logic regarding risk but that logic could be applied to other industries too - but they are not. You park your car and someone damages it - in this case the other driver owns up and admits responsibility - you have to inform your insurance even if no financial obligation is being levelled on your own insurance - and they bung up your premium because your risk has increased. Perhaps we should just jail males between 18 and 24 yrs of age that are unemployed because they are a higher risk of committing crime or drug use - that's the statistics, Fat people on planes - should be charged more because I have to pay for luggage weight but the obese travel at the same ticket price as me - that or I should have a discount or increased luggage weight allowance It seems with insurance statistics are king but that assessment doesn't apply to any other industry, anyone that doesn't obtain a range of quotes for any type of insurance come renewal time will not respond to a letter informing them there is a possibility of saving money if they change insurer - so a complete waste of time - and that's why the industry doesn't bat an eyelid to these changes in regulations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart21UK Posted April 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2017 5 hours ago, Glyn said: Number one proposal - that's a great idea and it will allow you to identify the sneaky antics of the insurance industry when they raise premiums by the back door. The statuted laws they ignore - The all singing all dancing Equalities Act 2010, The law states you cannot discriminate on certain protected characteristics - s3x, Age, marital status - but insurance has dispensation to ignore these factors - I can see the logic regarding risk but that logic could be applied to other industries too - but they are not. agree with some of what you say there but http://www.fsa.gov.uk/consumerinformation/product_news/insurance/gender-insurance-pricing gender neutral pricing came in in 21/12/2012 for all insurance ...having to print the previous years premium is another example of leading people to not have to think for themselves...how hard is it to find last years paperwork to compare yourself at renewal (its paperwork you should have readily accessible in the event of a claim anyway)? It annoys me that we are teaching a generation(s) to have to think less and/or take responsibility for some of their financial decisions, which is what we should be doing instead of feeding them information so they dont have to think too hard about it (poor lambs)...dont get me wrong I am most definitely NOT defending the insurance industry even if I do work within it (not car insurance though)...I dont like the way they work anymore than the next person (and am expecting an unjustified premium increase for my car come renewal, due to a non-fault accident in 2016). Apparantely next week Sainsbury's are bringing out a new pricing strategy..alongside the price they charge for say a tin of beans, it will also show the price charged by Aldi/Tesco/Waitrose/Morrison etc (will it fek) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart21UK Posted April 2, 2017 Author Report Share Posted April 2, 2017 found this mind maybe right up our street being Boxster drivers... http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/gender-neutral-pricing-hairdresser_uk_58c6ac31e4b0ed71826e01aa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.