Setanta Insurance

bugs_bus

I renewed my van insurance through a broker with Setanta. I paid the €500 premium on the 15th of January this year for the policy start date of the 6th of February.
Last week I received a letter from the broker telling me Setanta was out of business, however in the first line of the letter they say that they sent a letter in early February informing me that Setanta were no longer issuing insurance and renewals etc. The thing is I didn't receive this letter and I suspect that they never sent me this letter to inform me. If they had I could have cancelled my policy and gone elsewhere. Have I any legal recourse in this instance?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

peteb2

Broker arent running around trying to cover their asses at the moment. They are running around trying to cover their clients vehicles!

No. You have no legal recourse. There was no legal requirement to issue a letter.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

peteb2

Which is what Fred?

mercfisher

Hi Bugs Bus, you should demand a refund from your broker, as Setanta issued a statement on 24th of January saying from that date they were not doing any renewals or taking any new customers, this was reported in the media ....check Irish Times 27th January, article by Fiona Reddan headline was" Setanta Insurance closes to new business", if this was in the newspaper its indefensible to take money from you after this date.


Also if you look at Setanta's web site it says that they are regulated by the Central Bank Of Ireland, they were not !
So why was a professional body such as Insurance broker dealing with a company which is misleading its customers ?

Contact the Consumer Association in the first instance , write a letter to your broker asking for a refund on the basis that it was in the public domain that Setanta was closing from the 24th January and then if you do not get a refund you should report this to the Financial Services Ombudsman.
Good Luck

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

mercfisher

Yeah Fred, I'm going to report this to my local Garda station as well as I do believe that this should be looked into, there is an EU commission set up to investigate the operation and closure of Setanta, the EU commissioner that has landed the job is Michel Barnier (French obviously) so he will be able to tell us who was noble and who is not .... in relation to this..so we will eventually know why Irish brokers were taking money for a company that was going doing the plug hole.

peteb2

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Why would they? As has been stated over and over again, brokers were aware of Setanta planning an exit of the market. That doesn't stop them from being a position of running their book off effectively at the time of renewal.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

bugs_bus

Thanks for replies and suggestions. I was also told by another guy in insurance that the broker would normally hold onto the clients money for 6-8 weeks before paying the insurance company. So even though I paid on the 15th January, they would have had my money in their account when they learnt of the winding down. Whether they didn't have a legal obligation to inform their customers I think they would have a moral obligation - and so I think I do have a case against them.

mercfisher

Bugs bus you definitely have a case, just go the correct route to find a solution, ie. the cheapest for you, if you go down the solicitor route the refund may not cover the cost of the solicitor as the broker would settle before the court and therefore no award of costs, each would have to pay their own, and if your broker has the typical brass neck of a broker then he'd have deeper pockets than you and run it out so that the costs were above what its worth in the first place...as I said earlier go to the Consumer Agency and report it, then request a refund and then the Financial Services Ombudsman, there's always the small claims court !

oldyouth

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Where did you get that from? They were not 'gone' by then, they announced they were exiting the market in a 12 month run off which happens ALL THE TIME in the Irish insurance market

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

mercfisher

A run off, means no new business ! Setanta announced no new business on 24th January and new insurances policies were given to people in February, that's not a run off that a RIP OFF, and it does not happen all the time, when were 75000 people affected last by insurance exiting the market like Setanta ? Quinn was bailed, as was PMPA .

oldyouth

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No, that's a different argument. You stated that brokers knew that Setanta was 'gone' on Feb 1 which is factually incorrect.

This is a topic which has generated more threads than I have seen before between AH, Banking & Insurance & Motors. Those affected are correctly annoyed, as I would be, but rubbish like that has me ending my assistance to fellow posters looking for answers

BuffyBot

That is my view

Yes, but not not it doesn't make it correct. Nor does your constant repetition.

Insurers of various sorts have run down their business over the years. This doesn't mean that they would not be in a position to fund claims/pay outs after a point.

So unless you have to very specific evidence that folks would have known this case was different, and are going to share it with us all, I'm going to say stop this constant implication you've smattered across every thread on this topic.

peteb2

Fred Swanson wrote: »

If I was a broker and I knew on Feb 1 that Setanta was gone and then took money for a renewal of Feb 2 and paid that to Setanta I would be getting some legal advice from a criminal lawyer.

The correct thing would be to have told the person I will have to find you some other cover and do that, rather than screw over the client.

This is the reason I would never use a broker.

Brokers seem to be completely unwilling to admit they did wrong. Instead it is double commissions for all!

Fred you are showing your complete lack of understanding about the matter bar what you may have heard. Setanta were not gone on 2 February. They were gone from 17 April. That they indicated they were withdrawing from the market doesnt mean that one should assume they were in trouble. A lot of insurers withdraw from certain lines of business. Aviva stopped doing motor bikes years ago, doesn't mean they were going bust!

Nicki6000

peteb2 wrote: »

Fred you are showing your complete lack of understanding about the matter bar what you may have heard. Setanta were not gone on 2 February. They were gone from 17 April. That they indicated they were withdrawing from the market doesnt mean that one should assume they were in trouble. A lot of insurers withdraw from certain lines of business. Aviva stopped doing motor bikes years ago, doesn't mean they were going bust!

Exactly, Travelers Insurance withdrew from the Motor Insurance market a few years back. No broker could have foreseen this disaster and for people to come online and say the brokers are being 'exposed for what they are' is just ignorant..

mercfisher

The time frame and facts are. On the 24th of Jan 2014 Setanta stated that they were withdrawing from writing new cover and renewals from close of business in Ireland. Setanta, although Maltese registered did not operate in any other country apart from Ireland, so if they were pulling out of Ireland they were essentially winding up the company. The only reason that they would stop trading is they were making no money or losing money... the risk now being that funds would not be available to meet existing claims or future claims, one would expect so that from the 24th Jan 2014 it would not be even possible to start a new policy or a renewal, yet there are hundreds if not thousands who have had policies renewed by brokers after the notice that the company was withdrawing, this is the reason why people are so angry, they were given incorrect or misleading advise by a professional broker who at the least should've known better. Where the company took money directly from customers on their website after 24th January would be considered wreckless trading and the liquidator would report this to the Maltese Financial Services Authority for him to act as he sees fit, oh and Setanta said on their website that they are regulated by the Central Bank Of Ireland, they are not are were never.So you can make up your own mind why brokers went ahead and gave cover and its not a case of having foresight, the info was in the public domain never mind in Insurance circles.

peteb2

Incorrect Mercfisher. So don't say something is fact when it isn't. It was possible to renew after January as they were conducting an orderly wind down. There would have been clients from every other month prior to that that needed to be run off.

Also their website says that they are regulated by Central Bank Ireland for business conduct rules.

Get it right or don't bother.

Henry Ford III

peteb2 wrote: »

Incorrect Mercfisher. So don't say something is fact when it isn't. It was possible to renew after January as they were conducting an orderly wind down. There would have been clients from every other month prior to that that needed to be run off.

Also their website says that they are regulated by Central Bank Ireland for business conduct rules.

Get it right or don't bother.

Orderly wind down? They went bust!

peteb2

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Orderly wind down? They went bust!

Yeah on the 17th April! Not in January as indicated above.

mercfisher

pete2b you are not looking at this objectively, it was stated by Setanta and reported in the media (Irish Times article by Fiona Reddan that no new business or no new renewals would take place after close of business on 24th January FACT heres an extract from the article

Setanta Insurance, a Dublin-based insurer, has ceased writing new business and issuing renewals as of last Friday, January 24th.

The company's offices in Blanchardstown, west Dublin, will remain open to handle all existing and any future claims arising and also assist with any queries.

Brokers some how managed to deal with a company that had a liquidity problem after Jan24th but they shouldn't have FACT.

If you need to know anything else please ask

mercfisher

They went into liquidation in April 17th yeah of course, but told the world on Jan24th that they were in trouble and not continuing with any new policies or renewals, this is very easy to understand !

peteb2

mercfisher wrote: »

pete2b you are not looking at this objectively, it was stated by Setanta and reported in the media (Irish Times article by Fiona Reddan that no new business or no new renewals would take place after close of business on 24th January FACT heres an extract from the article

Setanta Insurance, a Dublin-based insurer, has ceased writing new business and issuing renewals as of last Friday, January 24th.

The company's offices in Blanchardstown, west Dublin, will remain open to handle all existing and any future claims arising and also assist with any queries.

Brokers some how managed to deal with a company that had a liquidity problem after Jan24th but they shouldn't have FACT.

If you need to know anything else please ask

That doesn't say they weren't renewing policies. That says they weren't issuing more renewals. By that time they had issued renewals up until March. Fact.

Just because a company announces a wind down it doesn't mean they have liquidity issues. Fact.

So you feel free to ask anything.

Henry Ford III

peteb2 wrote: »

....Just because a company announces a wind down it doesn't mean they have liquidity issues. Fact.

Absolutely, but in the case of the company we're discussing it turns out that they did.

Please try to stay on topic.

peteb2

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Absolutely, but in the case of the company we're discussing it turns out that they did.

Please try to stay on topic.

That wasn't what was stated. They didnt go bust in January. And if youve a problem with what ive said feel free to refer it to a moderator. Which I note you aren't.

punisher5112

Anyone any news from there special meeting today.

I recieved a letter telling me about the meeting but don't know what has been decided.

Henry Ford III

peteb2 wrote: »

That wasn't what was stated. They didnt go bust in January. And if youve a problem with what ive said feel free to refer it to a moderator. Which I note you aren't.

By whom? The facts are that Setanta were in trouble and subsequently went bust.

Are you trying to dispute this?

peteb2

Henry Ford III wrote: »

By whom? The facts are that Setanta were in trouble and subsequently went bust.

Are you trying to dispute this?

No. Mercfisher stated for a fact something that wasn't in January. They gave no indication of being in trouble in January. That they went bust indicates they were. But there were no abnormal outward signs in January.

BuffyBot

Indeed, and that particular dead horse has been flogged enough folks

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

mercfisher

Henry I think some guys on here see things through "brokers glasses" fact is they had liquidity problems in January and in February and in March and finally because of liquidity the went into liquidation in April, its a natural enough process ...they said that they would not take on any renewals or new underwritings after 24th of January because of liquidity no doubt,,,,yet our Irish brokers managed to deal with a company after this date , take money and sell what is worthless insurance and peteb2 thinks this is normal, come on lads a bit of reality here, write to your broker and demand a refund if you got insurance from them after 24th January give them 5 working days to refund you and log your complaint with the Consumer Association.

LostArt

if you got insurance from a broker after Jan 24th you will get no refund, if you got insurance after March 12th you may have a case. Setanta officially stopped renewals from March 12th.

peteb2

mercfisher wrote: »

Henry I think some guys on here see things through "brokers glasses" fact is they had liquidity problems in January and in February and in March and finally because of liquidity the went into liquidation in April, its a natural enough process ...they said that they would not take on any renewals or new underwritings after 24th of January because of liquidity no doubt,,,,yet our Irish brokers managed to deal with a company after this date , take money and sell what is worthless insurance and peteb2 thinks this is normal, come on lads a bit of reality here, write to your broker and demand a refund if you got insurance from them after 24th January give them 5 working days to refund you and log your complaint with the Consumer Association.

Yet again another incorrect assumption. A withdrawal from an unprofitable line of business is common place insurance. Without a requirement to liquidate a company.

Your broker wont refund any premium paid after January 24th. That belongs to the liquidator.

Consumer association has no power so consider it a waste of time and paper.

peteb2

Fred Swanson wrote: »

Then the brokers should have advised their clients not to accept these.

On what basis?

Henry Ford III

My interest concerns the quality (or lack of quality) of the advice provided by Brokers regarding renewals with Setanta.

I don't think it's credible for Brokers to just shrug their shoulders and claim that they knew nothing. They should have known. Their job involves giving best advice on product and provider after all.

peteb2

Henry Ford III wrote: »

My interest concerns the quality (or lack of quality) of the advice provided by Brokers regarding renewals with Setanta.

I don't think it's credible for Brokers to just shrug their shoulders and claim that they knew nothing. They should have known. Their job involves giving best advice on product and provider after all.

Here we go again. Do I really have to say orderly withdrawal of the market again? ? Product was fine as was provider based on the information to hand.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Henry Ford III

peteb2 wrote: »

Here we go again. Do I really have to say orderly withdrawal of the market again? ? Product was fine as was provider based on the information to hand.

That would be fine had it been so, but it wasn't. They went bust.

The product therefore wasn't fine, and nor was the advice to renew with them.

peteb2

Henry Ford III wrote: »

That would be fine had it been so, but it wasn't. They went bust.

The product therefore wasn't fine, and nor was the advice to renew with them.

And here we go in a circle yet again.

What was wrong with the product? And who knew they go bust? You think for the all the overtime involved in sorting the mess out that broker would have suggested renewing as opposed to moving? I don't think so.

rayfitzharris

Hi, just thinking out loud here, maybe someone of a legal background can comment; But does your transaction with a broker represent a contract with a Professional, engaged by you to select an insurance product suitable for your needs? The brokers after all are the experts in this field and so are best placed to offer you the less knowledgable customer professional advice in this area.

I believe they issue a letter stating why they selected the particular insurance product to fit your needs. I'd assume they would take into account the insurers ability to meet claims as a most basic requirement. But I don't know if this is a legal or regulatory requirement. I suspect it is as I can't see them volunteering this statement (and stationary) unless compelled to do so.

I'm wondering if this failure represents Professional Negligence under this contract with your broker?

Especially in light of the fact that they and even the media knew back in January that this whole pyramid scheme was collapsing.
(No new money in = no money for payouts) and couldn't be bothered to even inform their clients, the people they were earning commission on.

I believe that Brokers do constitute Professionals. This lecture by solicitor Patrick Mullins seems to support this assertion: can't post URL
So search MLB dot ie for professional negligence
MLB dot ie /info_prof_negligence

I'd love to hear from anyone of a legal background if this would be an angle to pursue in trying to get brokers to refund premiums and commission unfairly earned?

mercfisher

Pete the problem with the product was that it didn't do as it said on the tin. Brokers have a duty of care and through greed or stupidity didn't give the advice that they charged for, I spoke to a solicitor today who advised that my broker failed as a professional in the advise which he gave and Im very happy with what the solicitor said "BROKER should not have given advise to use Setanta after 24th Jan" end of story "and certainly should not have taken money from me after this date".
I really don't want a merry go round here so I won't post on this again but please don't say brokers didn't know, say brokers didn't care most likely fast buck and shaft everyone attitude!

Corvo

mercfisher wrote: »

Pete the problem with the product was that it didn't do as it said on the tin. Brokers have a duty of care and through greed or stupidity didn't give the advice that they charged for, I spoke to a solicitor today who advised that my broker failed as a professional in the advise which he gave and Im very happy with what the solicitor said "BROKER should not have given advise to use Setanta after 24th Jan" end of story "and certainly should not have taken money from me after this date".
I really don't want a merry go round here so I won't post on this again but please don't say brokers didn't know, say brokers didn't care most likely fast buck and shaft everyone attitude!

How can you say they didn't care? Most brokers had to pay huge amount of overtime to staff in order to try and organise emergency cover, suffered any amount of delays and backlogs, had a plethora of angry customers to deal with on a sudden basis on the 17th of April.

How can you actually believe a broker would want that?

To be honest - all this "they didn't care and were just looking to make a quick buck" attitude you keep rambling on about sounds like a person who has had a previous bad experience within the insurance industry like an unpaid claim or the like, and you seem to be on some tirade to point the finger at the broker constantly.

Henry Ford III

Corvo wrote: »

How can you say they didn't care? Most brokers had to pay huge amount of overtime to staff in order to try and organise emergency cover, suffered any amount of delays and backlogs, had a plethora of angry customers to deal with on a sudden basis on the 17th of April.

How can you actually believe a broker would want that?

To be honest - all this "they didn't care and were just looking to make a quick buck" attitude you keep rambling on about sounds like a person who has had a previous bad experience within the insurance industry like an unpaid claim or the like, and you seem to be on some tirade to point the finger at the broker constantly.

Perhaps they were just incompetant?

BuffyBot

It's almost like I've been talking to myself. Trust me, I wasn't.

If I have to start taking action against, what I assume, are fully functional adults it's going to be swift. Do not say there was no warning.

peteb2

mercfisher wrote: »

Pete the problem with the product was that it didn't do as it said on the tin. Brokers have a duty of care and through greed or stupidity didn't give the advice that they charged for, I spoke to a solicitor today who advised that my broker failed as a professional in the advise which he gave and Im very happy with what the solicitor said "BROKER should not have given advise to use Setanta after 24th Jan" end of story "and certainly should not have taken money from me after this date".
I really don't want a merry go round here so I won't post on this again but please don't say brokers didn't know, say brokers didn't care most likely fast buck and shaft everyone attitude!

As I said for the amount that will end up getting paid out in overtime no broker would have advised going ahead if they knew. Setanta didnt pay any more commission than anyone else in the market. Their products was better than most in terms of benefits. And as mentioned before if offered Setanta for 300 or Allianz for example for 500 what would they go for? In fact brokers would have made more money by saying to go with the higher price

mercfisher

Me thinks the brokers protest too much !! for the record, I've never had a problem with an insurance company or broker for the record up to 24th Jan and the Setanta fiasco...your comment is grossly misleading and unfair and confirms what i've said about brokers already, unprofessional out to make a quick buck and take advantage of a commercial situation which shafted punters, I don't see the benefit of dealing with a broker at all after this.
This was in no way sudden, my solicitor told me that it was rumoured in early January with a statement on 24th January so why didn't the brokers get ready for the fallout, they buried their heads in the sand with pockets full of our money, sudden my a**e.

peteb2

My comment? How so? What is misleading? I've said that it would have been more profitable for brokers to sell you a more expensive policy and say that Setanta were going bust (when they were and would have been considered quite defamatory). Than to sell Setanta, wait for it to go bust and then have staff in for two weeks flat out to sort the problem for about €23 per €350 policy when the overtime incurred will be well in excess that?

So if you want a proper discussion, stick around. If you want an unfounded rant, after hours is that way!

---

>

Its not like the legal profession has covered itself in glory in the last few years and if you are talking about making a quick buck, well I'm sure your solicitor knows all about that.

Your solicitor heard a rumour? I hear a lot of rumours. Doesn't mean they are true. Your solicitor also should know the legal ramifications of rumours! I'll say it again - it is possible to conduct an orderly wind-down of an unprofitable line of business without a company ending up in liquidation.

BuffyBot

Grand, so. If a few people insist of pulling each others hair they can do so via PM.