Disputing automatic renewal of car insurance /cancellation fee regarding this

[GrendelsMum]

Hi folks
I wonder if you can help me out with this one.
We bought car insurance from a well known car insurer.
They've automatically renewed the insurance, which we didn't want. In advance of the renewal, I repeatedly visited their website to see if there was a 'non renewal' option, and couldn't find any. I tried phoning their premium rate phone line and was put on hold until I gave up. Basically, I feel I was unable to stop them renewing it.
They're now demanding a payment of £70 which seems a) unfair, given I couldn't cancel the thing, and b) out of all proportion to any imaginable effort taken for them to cancel this.
I would be willing to pay some token amount proportionate to their efforts, which would consist of some automatic emails, two automatically generated letters, and two attempts to phone us.
What can I do about this?
Advice very much appreciated as it is both stressing me and pissing me off!

Surely to stop them renewing it, you just write to them telling them you will not be reneweing and understand that you will not have insurance with "XXX" company as of 00:00 on Monday 31st February, or whatever.

If you haven't told them you want to cancel then yes, they do automatically renew the policy. You could have cancelled the policy, but they need it in writing, because of the implications of you being uninsured if you don't get something else in place, rather than a phone call.

My concern is is that I could sign up online, but then there didn't seem to be any online option at all to say that I didn't want renewals.

The OFT guidelines regarding continuous payment authorities state that "It is good practice to enable the customer to cancel using the same medium as was used for CPA sign-up (for example, if sign-up was online, there should be an option to cancel online)." Okay, so that's just good practice, but it seems to me they've contravened it.

Moreover, the OFT guidelines also state "Consumer consent to a CPA should not be assumed - such as through the use of opt-out provisions. The consumer must positively indicate their informed consent to the use of a CPA. For example, where a consumer is offered a free trial, after which payments will be taken, the consumer should be asked to agree to the actual liability before any payments are taken. Failure to do so may result in the contract being considered unenforceable, with the consumer being entitled to a refund of all payments made."

I think that this is what they're doing - they've assumed consumer consent to a CPA - and this is what is annoying me.

I'm not sure you can have them up for contravening what is only good practice guidance. Also, i think you may find that they would argue that they got you to agree to the CPA in some way when you first applied for the insurance, rather than something you have to be asked when it came to renewal.

Hmm - do you think I can ask them to show me where I agreed to the CPA? I've a memory from MoneyBox that there's some dispute about whether insurers were properly getting people to agree to a CPA.

I suppose I'm pissed off if they haven't done what they're required to, and are making money off it as a result -sure, I can actually afford to pay up, but I suspect a lot of people would be put in a difficult position.

I do appreciate your thoughts on this, by the way - you're calming me down no end.