Further to previous correspondence regarding Norwich Union and their dual pricing and so on, another facet to this ongoing saga is that since Norwich Union took over the London & Edinburgh motor account we have noted a continual loss of renewals where older drivers are concerned.

London & Edinburgh were a good market for the elderly clients, that we somewhat lovingly refer to as "wrinklies", but to give an example of one case, we have just lost a client who is 94-years-old.

He renewed with London & Edinburgh last year at approximately £140 and this year as there was no other market, we had to send his renewal from Norwich union at a premium in excess of £400.

Needless to say we have not heard back from the client – but are concerned that the shock may have killed him and he is lying behind his front door still grasping the renewal letter in his hand.

We appreciate that the elderly drivers are perhaps not such good risks as middle aged or younger ones, but do Norwich Union really have to viciously cull the clientele in this manner? And do Norwich Union appreciate that they could almost or even physically be culling them with such massive increases on premiums?

Are other brokers finding similar problems – or are we just unfortunate in having a large retired population in this area?
ID Bevan-Mogg,
Vaughan Insurance Brokers

Claims Direct no go
I think it is unfortunate that your article in the edition of May 18, Abbey Habit Great for Claims Direct, does not mention the fact that clients at Claims Direct have to pay 30% commission on settlement of their claim and full solicitors costs, whereas in the event of a win only costs enforceable by the Court can be recovered.

With the various insurance schemes available to solicitors, there is just no reason why they should go to Claims Direct, irrespective of the withdrawal of legal aid.

Likewise, a large proportion of their clients do not realise that fee legal expense insurance is available to them as part of their motor or household insurance.
Re Gaylor
Chartered Insurer

Not the lead letter
I have just received the highlight of the week – your veritable tome of enjoyment.

I particularly enjoyed the 'jeu des mots' in Backchat, but I admit to being defeated by the Headline of the article relating to your "naval" origins in the May 18 edition – no, not the IT, nor even the dark galley – but the "lead'.

At first, I thought, perhaps, the non-ferrous metal roof on the building had been stolen – but no.

Whilst the best brains around were trying to figure this one out, I happened upon the "Quotes of the Week" wherein the answer lay – Statutary!

Clearly, the grammatical gremlin has been at it or perhaps Spellcheck has excelled itself again!