JEFF PRESTRIDGE: Profiteering? Never, say the insurers… but premiums keep rising

By Liam On Jun 10, 2023

Insurance company representatives appeared before the Treasury Select Committee last week. They were called in to respond to allegations of profiteering such as car and home insurance premiums for the stratosphere.

Of course, they denied such behavior, although all evidence from readers suggests otherwise.

Rising claims costs – fueled by inflation – which insurers say are the cause of higher coverage costs, do not explain why some customers see their premiums increase by more than 50 percent.

Increases that are not due to a recent claim or a change in the terms of a policy.

Industry defenders also took the opportunity to declare that long-term customers are no longer penalized with higher premiums – a result of insurers strictly adhering to new rules introduced by the Financial Conduct Authority to ensure this “loyalty” to eradicate a fine.

Taking advantage? The rising cost of claims – fueled by inflation – which insurers say is driving higher coverage costs, doesn’t explain why some insurance premiums have risen by more than 50%

These rules now require insurers to provide cover to existing policyholders at the same price a new customer would get.

Again, I’m not convinced this is 100 percent true. After all, if an existing customer gets the same price as a new policyholder (for identical coverage), why are some insurers still willing to offer price discounts when customers request their renewal premium?

It’s also unfortunate that these new rules don’t apply to car breakdown coverage, as providers still apply loyalty penalties.

It’s what Green Flag (part of Direct Line) tried to do to Sarah Taylor when her cover needed revamping. It wanted to increase its annual premium from £66.08 to £95.20, a 44 per cent increase.

Exasperated, she went to the website, filled in her details as a new customer and got a quote of £69.44. She called them and it renewed her cover for the same price.

“It’s shocking how insurers treat loyal customers,” Sarah told me last week. I agree with that.

Does your pet’s cover go through the roof of the kennel?

Dog lover: Formula 1 driver Lewis Hamilton with bulldog Roscoe

I have owned a number of dogs over the years. There was West Highland Terrier Bobby (named after Bobby Taylor, a former goalscoring machine at the West Bromwich Albion Football Club) who once managed to devour the passenger seat of the family car in a moment of madness.

Tara, a delightful lurcher, followed. She was a very different kettle of hunting dog. Tara, a rescue dog who had been treated horribly by her previous owners, took a moment to trust us. But once we won her over, she was a gracious and loving pet, happiest lounging on the couch, waiting for her tummy to be caressed.

I’ve been petless for a while but I’m not sure I could afford another one even if it was a rescue dog like Tara. This is due to the rising cost of pet insurance, a problem that I know annoys many readers.

According to A-Plan Insurance, it currently costs an average of £66.50 a month to insure an English bulldog, a result of the breed’s vulnerability to respiratory problems.

Not far behind are the French bulldogs (£54.73 per month) who suffer from the same ailments as their English counterparts.

I am sure most of you believe that your beloved pet is worth every penny you hand over to insurers. But I’d love to hear from readers who’ve seen their pet insurance bills go through the proverbial kennel roof.

Proof that this magazine Saga is far from over

Subscriptions: Saga now charges an annual fee for print copies of its popular magazine

Thank you to the readers who have reached out to complain about Saga’s decision to forego an offer it made years ago that allowed people to take out a lifetime subscription to the popular monthly magazine.

Subscribers have now been told that if they want to continue receiving hard copies, they will have to pay an annual fee.

The move has understandably not gone down well with some subscribers, most of whom are now in their 70s and 80s. While Saga says customers can watch the magazine digitally for free, subscribers claim it’s not the deal they signed up for.

Last week I asked Saga if a) it would reconsider its decision; b) thought the move was a good fit for a business model aimed at the over 50s; c) it had taken legal advice before revoking its original deal.

It didn’t answer any of my questions. But it did say, “We’re sorry if subscribers are disappointed – but going digital is the best way to ensure we can bring Saga Magazine to as many readers as possible in an economically viable way.”

It added: ‘The vast majority of lifetime subscribers have been understanding and we’ve had strong adoption of the digital option. The digital version also has additional benefits, such as the ability to enlarge text and listen to the main articles.’

I’m not sure if we’ve heard the end of this saga.

Too close to home… campaigner town loses last bench

Campaign: Former NatWest manager Derek French

No one has done more to bring about the birth of banking hubs than campaigner Derek French.

Through these hubs (private and business) customers of all major banks can use them to deposit and withdraw money – and to speak to employees of their own bank on selected days.

French’s struggle has been a long one, beginning in the late 1990s with the Campaign for Community Banking Services.

But the former NatWest manager is seeing his dream come true: a hub installed in every city where all banks have closed their branches.

Yet the dream is not without constant nightmares. So far, only five hubs have come off the ground, despite dozens more being promised but yet to materialize.

There are also glitches in the system that determine which cities should get a hub. Ironically, they’ve just reared their ugly heads in Derek’s hometown of Harpenden, Hertfordshire, where Barclays is pulling the plug on its bank. When it closes, Harpenden will be bankless.

In theory, the closure of the Barclays branch should qualify Harpenden for a hub, but it’s being disqualified because there’s still a Nationwide in town that’s open four days a week.

According to the conditions of the formation of hubs, they can only be installed in cities where all banks AND the construction company across the country are no longer present on shopping streets.

Frans rightly argues that this is ridiculous because Nationwide is not a bank and does not offer banking services to companies.

Oddly enough, says French, the continued presence in Harpenden denies that the town is a hub that desperately needs its assortment of independent retailers, clubs, charities and small businesses to do their banking and access personalized advice.

This bug in the hub system needs to be corrected.

Don’t fall for Manchester ‘merger’

Building associations are rarely taken over – they merge, they say. That’s how Newcastle and Manchester’s coming together was described last week following regulatory approval.

However, don’t be fooled. This is the rescue of a small mutual fund (Manchester) that should have been put out of its misery years ago.

It made some terrible business decisions, suffered losses in both 2018 and 2020, and hadn’t paid a single mortgage loan since 2013.

What, I ask you, is the purpose of a society that cannot provide mortgage financing to those who live in its hinterlands? There isn’t one.

Although Newcastle boss Andrew Haigh was quick to welcome Manchester’s 11,000 members and 40 staff (‘colleagues’), the truth is that Manchester’s £200 million in assets will be included in his next month bigger brother, which is 25 times as big.

It will then sit alongside those other societies that have messed up (Cheshire, Derbyshire and Dunfermline) but have ‘merged’ to maintain the industry’s reputation as the cuddly friend of savers and borrowers.

Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on it, we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money and use it for free. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to compromise our editorial independence.