FCA review prompts firms to commit to improving complaints handling, because they are basically crap.
Regulator identifies areas requiring further improvement.
Financial firms have agreed to make improvements to the way they deal with consumer complaints after collaborating with a Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) review.
The FCA added that it will be consulting on possible changes to its dispute resolution rules later this year.
The review did not deal with PPI complaints which have been dealt with separately.
Although the watchdog found some improvements and innovations have already been made there were areas that were identified as requiring further improvement.
They include firms not always considering the impact on consumers when designing and implementing processes as well as inconsistencies in the amount of redress offered, particularly for distress and inconvenience.
A working group made a number of recommendations on how complaints could be improved including changes to FCA rules.
These include ensuring that calls to dedicated complaints telephone lines cost no more than the basic rate and extending the next business day rule so that firms have longer to get consumer acceptance that the complaint has been resolved.
The FCA confirmed that it wants all financial firms to consider its findings and not just the fifteen that took part in the review.
Clive Adamson, director of supervision at the FCA, said: "Straightforward and effective complaints handling is an important aspect of how firms treat their customers.
"Correctly handled, they can help firms quickly deal with problems and keep their customers happy. Moreover, understanding the underlying reasons for complaints can help head off future problems.
Author: Ida Axling
Source: Insurance Age | 23 Jul 2015
Tags: FCA | complaint handling
Firms will have more time to resolve complaints, but can't charge customers premium rates for phone calls.
Financial services firms will have longer to resolve complaints less formally, according to new rules published by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
The regulator also published new rules on call charges, stating that financial services firms will be unable to charge their customers premium rates when they make phone calls to ask for assistance or to complain.
According to the FCA, firms will now have three days to address a complaint to a consumer's satisfaction, allowing them to resolve more complaints first time rather than trying to meet the current one day target.
The regulator said that the increased time will allow for better and easier resolution for a greater number of complaints and added that it expects this change to result in fewer consumers having to take their complaints further.
If a complaint is resolved within three days firms will be required to inform the complainant of their right to take their complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
It further stated that consumers will have access to more data on complaints made to financial services companies as firms will be required to report all complaints to the FCA. Under the current rules, firms only need to report complaints that take longer than one day to resolve.
Christopher Woolard, director of strategy and competition at the FCA, said: "Our rules will help deliver the quicker, easier and fairer resolution to complaints that consumers want. Getting this right is also vital for firms.
"A properly resolved complaint can keep a customer happy, and protect the firm's reputation. But, more than that, effective complaints handling systems can act as an early warning system for firms."
Are you a 'disruptive talent' like Sir Richard Branson?this made me laugh!and is why Motorclaimguru exist!
Arsonists cause half-a-million pounds worth of damage to cars after sparking devastating Heywood blaze
Millions facing a hike in insurance premiums: Increase of up to £100 a year expected for typical family.
Insurance giants will be forced to tell us why they're hiking rates: Firms told to print 'honesty box' on renewal letters in victory for the mail.
Jaguar Land Rover has had several issues with security surrounding its keyless ignition function.By Margi Murphy | Jul 10, 2015
Twitter Facebook LinkedIn Google PlusBritish carmaker Jaguar Land Rover is recalling 65,352 of its cars after a software glitchcaused its keyless cars to unlock themselves.
In one case, a driver reported that the door flew open while driving, while others were concerned that the cars were unlocking of their own accord.
The models affected are the entire fleet of 2013-2016 Land Rover Range Rover, the last of which went into production in March this year. On average the cars retail upwards of £30,000.
Jaguar Land Rover said owners will be notified and instructed to take their cars to a dealer who will “download the latest software” at no extra cost.
The recall was reported to the US’ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last month, who published the details.
Jaguar Land Rover has suffered several embarrassments over software malfunctions in the past year; and drivers have reportedly struggled to find insurance cover due to poor security.
Range Rovers were targeted because of vulnerabilities in its keyless ignition feature where thieves were able to bypass the security system, unlock and even start the car engine with small devices easily bought online.
Innovation at JLRThe firm is researching connected car tech to identify potholes, broken drains and manhole covers and share the information with other cars and road authorities nearby to help speed up road maintenance.
It will rival similar developments from Volvo, which has created an icy road sensor that it hopes will assist the local authorities as well as other drivers connected to the internet.
The new technology will also allow the car to adjust suspension settings to reduce impact – reducing puncture wheel and vehicle damage costs for drivers.
Google revealed that one of its self-driving car prototypes, outfitted with sensors and cameras, was rear-ended in the company’s home town of Mountain View on July 1, in the first accident for a Google car involving human injuries.
The company disclosed the accident on Thursday. Three employees complained of minor whiplash and checked into a hospital. The driver of another car involved in the accident complained of neck and back pain.
According to the accident report filed by Google with the California Department of Motor Vehicles, the self-driving SUV was traveling behind two other cars at about 15 miles per hour as it approached an intersection with a green light, reported the Associated Press.
The first car stopped at the intersection because traffic on the far side was not moving. Then both the Google car and the car just in front of it stopped as well.
About a second later, a fourth vehicle smashed into Google’s car at 17 mph, resulting in minor whiplash to passengers in both cars and causing the offending car’s front bumper to fall off. On-board sensors showed the other car had not braked. The Google SUV’s bumper was slightly damaged.
The three Google employees riding in the car at the time complained of minor whiplash and were checked into a hospital, but were soon cleared and allowed to go back to work. The driver of the second car complained of neck and back pain.
In a blog post, the head of Google’s self-driving car program, Chris Urmson, wrote that his SUVs “are being hit surprisingly often” by distracted drivers, perhaps by people looking at their phones.
“The clear theme is human error and inattention,” Urmson wrote. “We’ll take all this as a signal that we’re starting to compare favorably with human drivers.”
Urmson included a video showing a computer readout of the accident.
Google has been testing 20 self-driving prototypes in Mountain View. It has invested heavily in the technology as it believes their cars will be safer and more efficient than those driven by human.
Under California law, self-driving cars being tested on public roads must have a person behind the wheel who can take control in case of an emergency situation.
This was the 14th accident in six years and about 1.9 million miles of testing, according to the company. In 11 of the 14 accidents, Google said its car had been rear-ended.
Google said that its cars have not caused any of the collisions, though in 2011 an employee who took a car to run an errand rear-ended another vehicle while the Google car was out of self-driving mode.
#Fraudster's claim ruled fundamentally dishonest,don't try it on as this will happen to you!whiplash caught out.
Fraudster's claim ruled fundamentally dishonestAuthor: Ida Axling
Source: Insurance Age | 16 Jul 2015
Tags: Aviva | fraud
Football player ordered to pay Aviva's costs of more than £11,000 after his whiplash claim was dropped.
A court has ruled that a semi-professional football player made a dishonest claim for whiplash following a minor car accident after he tweeted about playing 24 hours after the collision.
Gary Burnett, 24, made the claim following an accident at a drive-thru restaurant in Birkenhead, Merseyside, where no injuries were reported and the damage was minor, which made his insurer Aviva suspicious.
Burnett claimed he had suffered injuries to his neck and back, leaving him unable to play for his team, Cheshire-based Northwich Victoria, for around four weeks. The claim was worth up to £2,000.
Aviva immediately launched an investigation into the football player and found his Twitter account where he had tweeted about playing when he had claimed he could not.
The claim was ruled fundamentally dishonest, which removes the protection claimants have from paying the other party's costs and opens the door to a criminal conviction, and the case was dropped by Burnett's solicitors.
A hearing was held at Wigan County Court on 13 July and the Judge ordered Burnett to pay Aviva's costs of more than £11,000.
Dave Lovely, Aviva global claims director, said: "This case highlights how a minor claim can be seen as an open-goal for fraudsters.
"However, we are determined to tackle these fraudulent claimants and stop them scoring against us and our customers. It shows that we will pursue and prosecute those who commit fraud, while taking care of genuine claimants."
Jared Mallinson, partner at Horwich Farrelly, the solicitors representing Aviva, added: "The hapless footballer clearly couldn't resist boasting about his performance on social media despite claiming to have been unable to play.
"The court's decision to find him fundamentally dishonest is a red card to any would-be fraudster that they will be caught."
Your readers should be aware of a crazy result of the change to the road fund license that could have nasty implications. In mid June I bought a Honda Jazz from a motor auction. The car was on a SORN with a full 12 months MOT. I agree with you it is great car. I insured and taxed it on-line the same night and also sent off the documents to DVLA to register the change of keeper. I collected the car from the auction site the next day secure in the fact that all documentation was in order. Today I received notification in the post from DVLA that I have not taxed the car since purchase. This despite having received an email from DVLA confirming my payment.
I contacted DVLA and was informed that they could see the record of payment but that the database showed the car as being untaxed. They promised to investigate and phoned back a few minutes later to say that the processing of the registration document had triggered a repayment of the tax I had just paid. They did say that the records had now been manually updated and I should destroy the repayment cheque that could be in the post to me. I have driven almost 1000 miles over the last 3-4 weeks, a good percentage on motorways with automated camera systems. I now await the arrival of fixed penalty tickets for driving an untaxed vehicle. When will DVLA get their act together and produce a system which is fit for purpose. I am sure that this must have happened to many other people before now.Asked on 10 July 2015 by Malcolm Rook
That is nuts, and a consequence of interfering with a system that was understood and which worked. Another consequence is that, if you change address the system can register this as a change of keeper and readers who notified DVLA of a change of address have since been fined for failing to re-tax their car after a change of keeper.
Millions facing a hike in insurance premiums: Increase of up to £100 a year expected for typical family.
Car insurance postcode lottery: Adam moved only 1,000 yards - but his insurer hiked his policy by an extra £474 a year
Do you love your #dog #pet ?then show it! restrain your dog whilst driving.Travelling With Your Dog And Other Pets
Here to help ensure consumers are treated fairly by insurance companies.