Cut off dead

I have recently been arranging motor insurance renewal as my current insurer was starting to get pricey for no real reason. I did the usual Meerkat kind of stuff and found a number of insurers who were offering substantially better quotes. A phone call to my current insurer only knocked about a tenner off their original renewal quote.

I picked one of the substantially better quotes from the comparison site and went ahead with the policy inception requirements. When it got to the payment part, I got to the end and it spat it out. I tried another card - same result. I know that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with the cards or the accounts to which they refer, so I contacted the insurer by phone and went through the whole process again with the call handler. This time there seemed to be no problem with the card used and things proceeded until the very end, when the call handler informed me that one or more of my verifications had not been accepted, but emphasising that I had not been refused insurance cover. (Funny, it seemed to me that I had.)

This is the point where things start to get very difficult. The natural thing is to ask what they mean as it is impossible to rectify something unless you are given sufficient information. The same verification script was unhelpfully trotted out exactly as before. Realising that this endless 'computer says no' scenario would get absolutely nowhere, I hung up.

I followed up another quotation online through a different comparison website. Crash, bang, wallop. Absolutely no problem. Objective achieved.

I was quite angry, as I had spent a long time buggering about with the first quote. What does concern me more is that the initial failed transaction may have placed a black mark of some sort against my name (credit rating, insurability etc) because of some bloody computer glitch. Because the policy is to clam up, I have no way of knowing what the problem was (I don't think that there was one, in reality).
 
I have recently been arranging motor insurance renewal as my current insurer was starting to get pricey for no real reason. I did the usual Meerkat kind of stuff and found a number of insurers who were offering substantially better quotes. A phone call to my current insurer only knocked about a tenner off their original renewal quote.

I picked one of the substantially better quotes from the comparison site and went ahead with the policy inception requirements. When it got to the payment part, I got to the end and it spat it out. I tried another card - same result. I know that there is nothing whatsoever wrong with the cards or the accounts to which they refer, so I contacted the insurer by phone and went through the whole process again with the call handler. This time there seemed to be no problem with the card used and things proceeded until the very end, when the call handler informed me that one or more of my verifications had not been accepted, but emphasising that I had not been refused insurance cover. (Funny, it seemed to me that I had.)

This is the point where things start to get very difficult. The natural thing is to ask what they mean as it is impossible to rectify something unless you are given sufficient information. The same verification script was unhelpfully trotted out exactly as before. Realising that this endless 'computer says no' scenario would get absolutely nowhere, I hung up.

I followed up another quotation online through a different comparison website. Crash, bang, wallop. Absolutely no problem. Objective achieved.

I was quite angry, as I had spent a long time buggering about with the first quote. What does concern me more is that the initial failed transaction may have placed a negative marker of some sort against my name (credit rating, insurability etc) because of some bloody computer glitch. Because the policy is to clam up, I have no way of knowing what the problem was (I don't think that there was one, in reality).

You should name and shame them so the rest of us can avoid them.
 

endure

GCM
They didn't say they were refusing you insurance - they're just saying your payment method didn't work.
 
You should name and shame them so the rest of us can avoid them.

They are called Zenith Insurance.

They didn't say they were refusing you insurance - they're just saying your payment method didn't work.

I would have thought that would have elicited the response 'payment method declined' or something similar. Not 'one or more verification methods not accepted'.

In any case, that card went through with no problem at all with RAC.
 

theoriginalphantom

MIA
Book Reviewer
nothing to do with todays major server issues perhaps? cleared by the time you got through to RAC?
 

theoriginalphantom

MIA
Book Reviewer
I wasn't aware of such a problem taking place. Have the Chinese got to us again?


actually it was yesterday, i thought it was today

Affected services included Airbnb, UPS, HSBC bank, British Airways and the PlayStation network used for online games
 

PhotEx

On ROPS
On ROPs
They are called Zenith Insurance.



I would have thought that would have elicited the response 'payment method declined' or something similar. Not 'one or more verification methods not accepted'.

In any case, that card went through with no problem at all with RAC.

Barclays will sometimes ask for a second source of verification, they send me texts.
 

theoriginalphantom

MIA
Book Reviewer
Other affected services reported by DownDetector included:
  • Banks such as Barclays, Lloyds, TSB, and Halifax
 
Barclays will sometimes ask for a second source of verification, they send me texts.

The only time anything like that happens to me is when the transaction is for a large amount and I'll get a code number SMSd to me, which you need to input.
 
Changing car meant updating insurance except they couldn’t Identify the car type.
Computer glitch on their end resulted in non renewal of car insurance two months later. Which was grand as I shaved thirty quid off the monthly bill
 
. . . . I would have thought that would have elicited the response 'payment method declined' or something similar. Not 'one or more verification methods not accepted'.

In any case, that card went through with no problem at all with RAC.
I think "'one or more verification methods not accepted", would relate to an inconsistency during their internet search of EVERYTHING you submitted on the application form.

Heaven knows what they’ve checked, but maybe . . . non-consecutive previous insurers? Years at present address? It could be absolutely anything :( .

You would have to ask - INSIST - that they are more forthcoming with the details of what is the discrepancy, so that you can rectify whatever is amiss on the interweb.
 
You would have to ask - INSIST - that they are more forthcoming with the details of what is the discrepancy

The problem is that fraud/money laundering legislation being what it is, if that is the area of the problem they are expressly forbidden from disclosing the nature of the problem or engaging in further conversation about it (even in the rare situations where a junior operator might actually be party to any details.)

It's a very poor, incomplete system designed to raise a red flag that something dodgy is going on. Unfortunately, redress or remedy for the innocent party in such situations is not at all a straightforward process. Think of what happened to all those Post Office sub-postmasters who were left to the mercy of a seriously flawed computerised accounting system.

As with any software based system it fails to take account of its own inherent errors or shortcomings and flawed data inputting. The consequences of a single failed transaction to an individual in such circumstances can be serious and long term.
 
The problem is that fraud/money laundering legislation being what it is, if that is the area of the problem they are expressly forbidden from disclosing the nature of the problem or engaging in further conversation about it (even in the rare situations where a junior operator might actually be party to any details.)

It's a very poor, incomplete system designed to raise a red flag that something dodgy is going on. Unfortunately, redress or remedy for the innocent party in such situations is not at all a straightforward process. Think of what happened to all those Post Office sub-postmasters who were left to the mercy of a seriously flawed computerised accounting system.

As with any software based system it fails to take account of its own inherent errors or shortcomings and flawed data inputting. The consequences of a single failed transaction to an individual in such circumstances can be serious and long term.
Freedom of Information request . . . ?!
 
Freedom of Information request . . . ?!

There are a number of things exempt from the FOI and I think that this anti-fraud legislation is one of them.
I think that about the best you can hope for is to get any negative credit-ratings sorted out. Even that is not a simple or straightforward process.

I can remember hearing something about it on Money Box Live or something similar.
 

cowgoesmoo

Old-Salt
No chance whatsoever of a negative impact on your credit record. You'll have a search recorded on your credit record from the quotation but labelled as an identify confirmation for an insurance product which isn't treated as a credit application so won't affect any credit scores and is ignored for credit applications. All thats recorded is the fact that a search was made so even if it was an issue with the insurance companies processes and you were declined it wouldn't be reported back to the CRA. The fact that your payment was declined is an issue between you and your bank, not the insurance company or CRA. Being refused insurance is a totally different thing from not being able to successfully pay for it. Nothing to worry about IMHO
 
Last edited:
No chance whatsoever of a negative impact on your credit record. You'll have a search recorded on your credit record from the quotation but labelled as an identify confirmation for an insurance product which isn't treated as a credit application so won't affect any credit scores and is ignored for credit applications. All thats recorded is the fact that a search was made so even if it was an issue with the insurance companies processes and you were declined it wouldn't be reported back to the CRA. The fact that your payment was declined is an issue between you and your bank, not the insurance company or CRA. Being refused insurance is a totally different thing from not being able to successfully pay for it. Nothing to worry about IMHO

Thanks, that's quite reassuring. I would hate to become a fiscal pariah simply because some computer had choked on its own binary.

I'm still not at all clear as to why the transaction did not go through, as things go a bit mute when such things happen and you get no leads from the other end. The funds were there, as evidenced by the subsequent successful transaction made elsewhere. I'm still not clear what the verifications were that failed several times during the first transaction attempt but which sailed through on the second transaction using exactly the same details.

I remember some years ago that sometimes things went south during ID verifications (new bank account applications etc ) because I made a point then (for personal reasons) of not being on any electoral register. I knew that this was probably the reason for the occasional glitches and I was quite prepared for them. It was further exacerbated by having no credit history at all. I had no loans, HP, credit cards, debts of any kind and my mortgage was already paid off. You'd think that would be a good thing, wouldn't you?; a bloke free from debt, no bankruptcies or CCJs etc. He seems like an ideal bet. Not so.

The next few transactions (with new institutions, at least) should determine whether or not this was just an irksome electronic but harmless hiccough.
 

endure

GCM
I remember some years ago that sometimes things went south during ID verifications (new bank account applications etc ) because I made a point then (for personal reasons) of not being on any electoral register. I knew that this was probably the reason for the occasional glitches and I was quite prepared for them. It was further exacerbated by having no credit history at all. I had no loans, HP, credit cards, debts of any kind and my mortgage was already paid off. You'd think that would be a good thing, wouldn't you?; a bloke free from debt, no bankruptcies or CCJs etc. He seems like an ideal bet. Not so.
Your credit record shows whether you're a reliable payer or not. If you have no credit record you're an unknown quantity as far as any finance outfit is concerned.
 
Your credit record shows whether you're a reliable payer or not. If you have no credit record you're an unknown quantity as far as any finance outfit is concerned.
Even though you might be a financial nightmare up to your back teeth in debt... just as long as you keep making that minimum payment, we'll give you more.
 

Bubbles_Barker

LE
Book Reviewer
Surely it was just because you used to be a copper?
 

Latest Threads

Top