They who must not be named/October 06 PC

[Anita_5109950]

O'h my god, I'm gobsmacked. Just received my copy of October PC in the post and there is an article about caravan insurance in it. Who do PC recommend at their Budget Choice for caravan insurance, none other than our old 'friends', *&*.

I appreciate it's probably supposed to be an unbiased article, and they do say that 'Where insurance is concerned, you're taking a calculated risk, so it's up to you to decide what price you put on peace of mind', but even so, come on. How many new caravanners, not yet having discovered their history, will pick up that magazine and think, after having spent a small fortune on a van, "O'h, they look reasonable, let's give them a try. After all PC recommend them".

It just goes to show that, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what we say here, no-one takes any notice.

Just a last thought, rather than the asterisked version of the name we all use, perhaps we should refer to them as Voldermort, after the Harry Potter character who was referred to as He who must not be named!!!!

Anita

 

[CliveV]

I to find this amazing - I have not read the article but I would suggest that PC is more interested in the fee it gets from *&* for the leaflet drop rather than anything else.

The feed back on this company is generally appalling in all the areas that it covers - Equine, Musical instruments, pets etc etc.

It also highlights another peculiarity about English Law. You normally have to be licensed to recommend a Financial Services Product in the UK (and in the EU) - thus if an individual set himself up in business and took a fee for gaining introductions for a Life Office or Insurance provider - that individual has to be registered with the FSA.

However, Journalists are excluded. So here we have a classic example of an Insurance provider with a truly shocking reputation being recommended as a "Best Buy" by a magazine that receives a monetary "kickback" (fee) for distributing this tacky companies advertising leaflets.

Er! - does anyone else see a slight conflict of interest here?

 

[CliveV]

I to find this amazing - I have not read the article but I would suggest that PC is more interested in the fee it gets from *&* for the leaflet drop rather than anything else.

The feed back on this company is generally appalling in all the areas that it covers - Equine, Musical instruments, pets etc etc.

It also highlights another peculiarity about English Law. You normally have to be licensed to recommend a Financial Services Product in the UK (and in the EU) - thus if an individual set himself up in business and took a fee for gaining introductions for a Life Office or Insurance provider - that individual has to be registered with the FSA.

However, Journalists are excluded. So here we have a classic example of an Insurance provider with a truly shocking reputation being recommended as a "Best Buy" by a magazine that receives a monetary "kickback" (fee) for distributing this tacky companies advertising leaflets.

Er! - does anyone else see a slight conflict of interest here?

PS - who would be Rita Skeeter then?

 

[BrianStAlbans]

Have to agree Clive ,I too could not believe the recommendation after all that has been said on this Forum. I have had no dealings with this company but though reading what has been written here know to stay well clear.

Also as you know in a former life I worked for a very large insurance company, ironically their initials were also PC, and I remember how many courses and exams I had to sit to licence me to do my job.

I think this is another case of the staff a PC eager to fill space with scant regard to actual content and in this case any concern for "fellow" caravanners.

Brian

 

[WatsonJohnG]

Can't help wondering if there is indemnity insurance against giving bad advice and if so is it with the company involved.

Could make for interesting reading down the line

 

[TripHazard]

Anita

I couldnt believe your post after all the hassle in the forum thread that we all know PC is aware off. But yes there it was a reccomendation for best budget. I have been a subscriber to the Mag for about 10 - 15 years and cant believe they would recommend their reader take insurence with such a company. I must seriously consider any further subscription as they have obviously no integrity. Readers should be the first consideration advertisers second without us you have no magazine advertising rags are ten a penny.

 

[CliveV]

I certainly have to have PII (professional indemnity insurance) John - it cost me

 

[Guest]

In my simple take, there seems to be unfair trade between the good people who post here and PC Magazine and the forum managers.

PC will take what suits its agenda and delete anything that may rock the advertising boat which I assume delivers its main profit. Members genuine concerns on whatever subject appear to be ignored as well.