Car insurance - can they really charge me for this???

[Plantyplantplants]

The insurer is First Central - I know, I know, lesson learned.

I switch my car insurance provider most years however one year I forgot to opt out of continuous payment and the full years premium was taken out of my account. I contacted my bank and they got the money back for me pretty quickly. I was unwell at the time and didn’t use the car for a few days, it was parked on the driveway so I didn’t get round to sorting the insurance until two days later.

Following this I called First Central to explain that I was now insured elsewhere and wouldn’t be needing to insure with them. First central have been trying to make me pay approx £50 for the two days worth of insurance when the car wasn’t covered (even though I didn’t drive it). They said the car needs to be insured continuously and I’d be committing an offence if it wasn’t. I told them I wasn’t paying and prepared to take the risk for a few days.

I have been ignoring their letters and it’s not been referred to debt collectors, BPO.

I’ve searched the internet but can’t find any relevant information anywhere. Can they legally uphold this charge?

Can anyone give me any pointers ok for where to go for advice?

At this point, as a matter of principle, I’d rather pay the fine to the DVLA for being uninsured than to give these tossers any money.

The reviews for First Central are shocking. How on Earth is such a crooked company still allowed to exist??

You were insured by them for that period though, and it was your mistake that meant you were covered by them for those two days.

Did they therefore cancel your insurance due to you reversing funds via the bank?

Yes you need to at least have third party insurance even if you don't drive the car, if it's parked on the road, your driveway or in your garage.

https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/insurance/insurance/types-of-insurance/vehicle-insurance/when-you-don-t-need-vehicle-insurance/

If it wasn't declared SORN, it needs insuring.

It's a time on risk charge, possibly with a cancellation charge. Yes, they are right to charge it

You can't cancel insurance retrospectively. If your car had been stolen or vandalised during those two days, they would have been obligated to pay out. The fact that you dislike the company is entirely irrelevant.

You do owe them the money and you are very unreasonable (and acting unlawfully) to refuse to pay.

You were insured by them for those 2 days.

What is the exact time line?

Was there a period between the policy roll over and when you cancelled the policy when there was cover in place?

If you had accepted the new policy by previously not deselecting auto renewal and then didn't cancel until after it started, then I guess you would have received cover?

If so, then they are effectively charging fir that cover plus admin costs?

Legally you need to have an agreement to have a contract. You had cancelled the payment and the course of your agreement had ended with the insurance company. Therefore they have no legal right to be demanding the money.
You need to be looking at contract law, I’ll see if I can find a link.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/banking-and-payments/continuous-payment-authorities

So you didn't call them to cancel, you just reclaimed via the bank? That means that you were still insured, and hadn't paid for it! Stopping a direct debit doesn't negate a contract - it just means you haven't paid for the thing you're using

I think this is one you're going to have to pay I'm afraid

If you had cancelled it and left the car not insured for 2 days until you started with a different company it wouldn't matter and the risk would be on you. But because you're notifying them of a day in the past to cancel they are within their rights to charge you and you should pay.

So rather than actually pay £50 for 2 days insurance - which you are legally required to have.

You'd rather risk them reporting you for having a illegally uninsured car for 2 days and the fines associated with that.

Is there a reason that when you say you don't/ didn't have time in your life to sort car insurance for 48 hours you feel the need to create hours of unnecessary drama 🙄

@Crazydoglady1980 but stopping a payment (or doing a chargeback after the fact) doesn't cancel a contract does it? I thought you had to contact the company and actually cancel the contract beforehand?

As above plus it’s not a “fine from DVLA” - it’s a criminal offence. Don’t be silly, just pay the £50

If you were able to cancel insurance after the fact, and not pay for it, because you hadn't 'needed' it, wouldn't everybody cancel every insurance policy they didn't claim on?

First central have been trying to make me pay approx £50 for the two days worth of insurance when the car wasn’t covered (even though I didn’t drive it)

When the car WAS covered because you forgot to cancel it. It doesn’t matter that you didn’t actually drive it.
Pay the £50.

@monpetitlapin In contract law you can’t agree to something by doing nothing, which is effectively what auto renew is. The original contract would have been for the 12 month cover, which had been completed. By cancelling the payment the OP stopped the action which would have lead to a new contract, therefore no new legal contract was made.
Legally there is also a 14 day cooling off period, where either side can cancel.

With respect, this is nonsense. OP had an agreement with the insurance company the previous year. One of the terms of said agreement was that it would auto renew unless OP took positive steps to cancel it. She didn't. She went to the bank and had them reverse the payment, which isn't the same thing. As a PP pointed out, continuous cover is a legal requirement and despite OP not driving the vehicle, her insurer would have been held liable to pay out on any claim (e.g. fire, theft) until she cancelled the policy and/or obtained cover elsewhere. OP should pay the £50 and count herself lucky.

@monpetitlapinIn contract law you can’t agree to something by doing nothing, which is effectively what auto renew is. The original contract would have been for the 12 month cover, which had been completed. By cancelling the payment the OP stopped the action which would have lead to a new contract, therefore no new legal contract was made.

Which might have been true if the OP had actually done nothing. But she didn't, the payment went through on the renewal date. Two days later she went to her bank and reversed that payment. But for those two days she had a contract, had insurance cover, and now has to pay for that.

@Plantyplantplants - the company may or not be 'tossers', however in this instance I don't believe any other Insurance company would be treating you any differently and would also be wanting you to pay for 2 days of Insurance ( plus an admin fee because you didn't cancel the policy in time)

It's tough, but did they not email you a month or so before to tell you it was going to be renewed? So you could also have told them then you didn't want to renew it? I'm sorry, but I do think they are within their rights to chase you for the £50 and you should just pay it? How long ago did this happen?

They did insure it for the 2 days even if you didn't use the car. Its covering a risk, not an event. With hindsight you can look back, and say "oh well nothing happened there was no risks". but its not true. It could have been broken into, stolen, been hit, or any number of things - of course none of them DID, but they covered the risk regardless.

Cancelling the payment is not cancelling the insurance. If your policy was set to auto-renew, they will (attempt to) charge you, and insure the car. If the payment fails (or you claim it back) they are actually attempting to be nice, and not leave you without cover - If it was reversed and they cancelled your cover because it was a day away from payday, or you accidently recalled the charge, you'd be hoping for leniency, that they'd continuously cover you.

For 2 days cover £50 is a lot compared to the year, but perfectly on par for a temporary short term cover.

Your one possible argument (probably depending on them being nice as opposed to any actual legal argument) would be it was covered elsewhere for the period - and you can prove it was doubly insured, but as it wasn't, you can't say that retrospectively they weren't bearing the risk, because if something HAD happened, likely you wouldn't be in so much of a hurry to dismiss the 2 days they'd covered.

If you want to cut off your nose and all that then crack on OP.

For the sake of principle (which is wrong by the way) you needed to be insured wether you used the car or not. Only a sorn would be appropriate to say you are keeping a car but uninsured. lime someone upthread said, if it had been stolen or broken into, you would have wanted the cover:

you are being vv unreasonable and foolish to end up with a ccj on your file for the sake of £50. Believe me even if you are skint you do not want that on your file.

Whenever I've had auto-renewal set up, I've had to cancel it in the thirty days before the renewal occurs if I don't want to be charged. Any later than that, and I've got to pay as normal.

You owe them £50. You can't just cancel a DD/go via the bank and totally ignore the company you had a contract with.

Thanks all. It looks like I should probably just pay it and rack it up to experience. I usually cancel the continuous payment for the following year as soon as I take out the policy but obviously didn’t on this occasion.

I do think continuous payment should be something you should opt in on, not opt out. I use it for house insurance as that doesn’t seem to go up much time however my car insurance quotes seem to leap quite dramatically if I don’t switch each year.