Vandals trashed my car – so why’s Sainsbury’s put my premiums up?

MY CAR was vandalised and I claimed on my Sainsbury’s Bank insurance.

Now the renewal schedule shows a hike of £137.31 on the premium since last year and an increase of £21.82 on the no-claims discount protection (NCD).

I queried and was informed it is because of my claim and there being no third party to pursue. When I pointed out I have NCD protection, I was told this has kept my noclaims at the maximum nine years, but does not protect my premium.

Call me naive, but I would have thought the words ‘discount protection’ would refer to the sum of money I pay. T. C., Leeds.

I WOULDN’T call you naive, but I would call you optimistic. unfortunately, when we make an insurance claim, the company tends to hike the premiums.

It’s not enough that we have paid for insurance year in, year out, they then want to claw back any claim we make.

No-claims discount protection does what it says on the tin: it protects the discount you receive on your total premium.

In your case, you had the maximum nine years’ discount and you still receive it, but because you made a claim, the premium rose. You can also factor in general rises in the cost of car insurance over the past year and, Sainsbury’s Bank says, the increase in insurance premium tax (IPT) from 6 pc to 9.5 pc in November.

I’m finding this IPT excuse trotted out rather too often by insurers. It would, in fact, increase a £106 premium including tax to £109.50. or, to take a more realistic example, push a £318 premium to £328.50. that hardly accounts for some of the huge increases motorists have complained of this year.

Sainsbury’s Bank did contact you to suggest removing breakdown cover from your policy — this would have reduced your quote to £393.11 for a year-on-year premium increase of £39.07. however, you chose to go elsewhere. I AM trying to get some money back from a Bupa care home and North Essex Clinical Commissioning Group — the NHS body responsible for planning and buying health services in our area.

In July 2015, my husband was diagnosed with a terminal brain tumour. He begged to be moved to a hospice. We were told he qualified for funding that would allow him to go into a private care home for the remainder of his life, as the local hospice had only 15 beds and a waiting list.

Then the CCG said my husband and I would have to pay £2,000 to the care home — but they would give me £112 a week towards his care. He died two weeks after entering the home. North Essex CCG said they would pay the £224 to the care home which would, in turn, refund me.

They claim to have paid this money on September 14, 2015, but Bupa says they did not.

All these months after my husband passed away, I am being passed from pillar to post. I want to make a donation to the Brain Tumour Charity, but doubt whether I will ever see this money. S. B., Essex.

North Essex CCG and Bupa have attempted to lay the blame for this at the other’s door.

Frankly, I don’t care which of the two is responsible. Both should be thoroughly ashamed of their behaviour. they knew you were owed this money and you were recently bereaved and doubtless in shock following the death of your husband.

they should have endeavoured to resolve this issue between them rather than leaving you to do the chasing. North Essex CCG provided a statement saying it was ‘deeply regrettable’ that you had not been reimbursed.

It added: ‘Money is paid directly to the nursing home, who then reimburse the patient or family. In this case, we instructed the care home last September to charge us through this policy.

‘As soon as Mrs B informed us she hadn’t been reimbursed, we acted swiftly to ensure the money was paid.’ that statement, issued on May 4, implies the money had already been paid to Bupa. however, Bupa provided me with evidence it was not paid until May 13. I asked Bupa whether it had, in fact, invoiced for this money in September and received the following reply: ‘We’re sorry this situation has happened and acknowledge that between the North Essex CCG and ourselves, we should have been able to secure the refund for Mrs B much faster.

‘however, as soon as we received it, we transferred it to Mrs B one day later.’

So while I can’t say for sure which is responsible, both have been irresponsible. You told me the refund has finally arrived in your bank account, which should put an end to this avoidable saga.

WE BOOKED flights for a family holiday through Expedia. My 12-year-old was charged £71 air passenger duty, but 12 to 15-yearolds no longer have to pay this.

I spoke to two Expedia call handlers who didn’t know what this duty was and just read out a spiel as if I wanted to cancel the flight. The last person I spoke to said I had paid a full adult fare for my child, but the invoice clearly states ‘Traveller 3 child’.

I’m £11 out-of-pocket already after phoning them at 10p a minute and through the cost of rebooking. Mrs H. D., Cleveland.

IN THE autumn statement of 2014, the Government announced that children under 12 would no longer pay air passenger duty in economy class on flights from May 1, 2015.

this exemption was extended to all children under 16 travelling on or after March 1, 2016. Your flight was scheduled for March 25 this year, so your 12-year-old should not have been charged the duty.

You sent me a copy of your invoice and, as you say, it clearly states the third traveller is a child, so why you were charged is a mystery.

I contacted Expedia and they have refunded the £71 duty and have offered a £11 goodwill gesture to cover your phone charges, plus a voucher as a goodwill gesture.

You’ve decided to use some of this money to buy some plants for a new bumblebee garden at your daughter’s school.