Asta la vista Endsleigh!

After reading Olivia Buck’s blog entry about Endsleigh mis-selling her Payment Protection Insurance, and hearing that Churchill Insurance have had their knuckles rapped by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for misleading claims, I wonder how many other insurance companies are out to trick us into paying for services we don’t need, tempt us with enticing offers that don’t exist, or plain and simply, how many just don’t do what it says on their tins?

Churchill Insurance is the latest culprit to join a long list, with one of their ads actually being banned by the ASA after a customer complained that it was misleading.

The ad, which stars the infamous talking dog, asks game show contestants to challenge Churchill on his insurance claims, with one man asking “is it possible to make a claim without filling in any forms?”

“Ooooohhhhh yesssss,” came Churchill’s response. That notoriously annoying catchphrase mimicked by many a middle-aged man thinking he’s even slightly funny…

However, one viewer really did challenge Churchill, pointing out that the ad was misleading because a form was sent out after he’d made an insurance claim.

Defending itself, Churchill Insurance said it does try to sort claims over the telephone “wherever possible,” but added that a fifth of cases required a declaration form or statement to be completed by the claimant.

So, is it possible to make a claim without filling in any forms? “Ooooohhhhh nnoooooo” doesn’t quite have the same ring.

The company apologised and said the claim was used “in error” and that it wouldn’t be repeated in future TV ads.

This isn’t the first time Churchill’s dog has made headlines though. Earlier in the summer the company were criticised, when it was reported that their canine front-dog said a rather offensive swear word immediately after his catchphrase. Of course, a Churchill spokesman denied the swearing.

Churchill isn’t the only bad egg in a battery farm of insurance companies though. Staff at Carphone Warehouse were caught by undercover researchers from BBC One’s Watchdog last autumn, after misleading customers about insurance for the Apple iPhone. The BBC researchers found Carphone staff made false claims about what would happen if a phone was stolen and hadn’t been insured.  According to the BBC, these false claims were made in the hope that “customers would take out the store’s own insurance”.

And back in January last year, a number of firms were slammed by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) for misleading customers, and told that they must stop using savings claims in their advertising that could be deemed misleading.

So are any other insurance companies misleading us? Is anyone safe? Have you fallen foul to a deceptive advertising claim or discovered that your insurance policy wasn’t all you thought it was? Have your say in our forum.

And the moral of the story: Don’t believe everything your told. Especially if it comes from the mouth of a talking dog…

 “How many times have I told you?”

In an attempt to cut illegal downloading by eighty per cent, an initiative involving music industry trade body, the BPI, the film industry and the government, has drawn up legislation that will potentially see the UK’s six largest internet service providers (ISPs) send out around 1,000 letters a week as a warning to those who use their bandwidth to illegally download, or worse, upload and share music and films.

The deal, ostensibly labelled as a Memorandum of Understanding, has been drawn up by the Department For Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) and signed by ISPs BT, Virgin, Orange, Tiscali, BSkyB and Carphone Warehouse.

Working alongside the ailing British music industry, which blames illegal downloading as the soul cause of its problems, the ISPs will soon be taking illegal downloading a lot more seriously. As a way of curbing the number of illegal downloaders in the UK, of which there is an estimated guilty 6.5 million, they will be sending threatening letters to the homes of anyone caught downloading or uploading files illegally.

If these warning letters aren’t a big enough deterrent, then naughty internet users could find certain sites blocked by their ISP, or even worse, have their connection speed slowed, making it impossible to download such content. There is also talk of cutting connections altogether if people refuse to stop downloading illegally – the ultimate punishment.

The “carry on doing this and we’ll cut off your broadband” warning letters are expected to have an immediate and long lasting effect, but critiques are sceptical. Consumer groups and music lovers, both legal and illegal, believe the onus is on the industry to modernise and keep pace with the evolving technology.

Even the artist’s themselves are accepting that illegal downloads are the way of the future. Welsh warbler Duffy is currently No 2 on illegal download site MP3 Fiesta’s chart, and she doesn’t seem that bothered. Speaking in ShortList magazine, she asked: “Downloading is amazing. It basically gives people access, where’s the harm in that?”

Continuing, she explains: “Illegal downloading can go two ways. Some people think it creates illegal access, but I think the big wheel is round, y’know?” Well no Duffy, I don’t really know. However, I do know that, according to BMR, the average teenagers iPod will blast out over 800 illegally copied songs, perhaps indicating that free downloading is a cheap alternative for music lovers who don’t want to pay £12 for an album from which they’ll only recognise one song…

The new deal between the ISPs and the government has caused a stir amongst internet users who want to keep their private lives private. The issue of monitoring internet usage is proving to be a controversial one, with many people complaining the UK is rapidly becoming a Big Brother nation, always under the watchful eye of the law.

To all those people who aren’t happy, if you’re not doing anything wrong then you’ll have nothing to worry about. What does it matter that MI6 are keeping tabs on the sites you visit and the links you click?

Personally, if the scheme does prove successful I don’t think music industry officials should expect the illegal downloaders to suddenly start forming a queue at HMV. I’m sure there are many other online time-consuming activities they can amuse themselves with. And while I don’t condone illegal file-sharing, and have never downloaded any music myself, I know plenty of people that have. Obviously not naming any names, I certainly wouldn’t want them to have their broadband cut off – who would I chat to on Facebook?