On August 22nd, we updated our report detailing how our GAP insurance policies compare to those available from each of our online competitors. In the report, we highlighted the fact that it wasn’t entirely clear whether the Shortfall.co.uk policies incorporated a ‘Market Value’ clause (in terms of the Motor Insurer’s payout) or not. Perhaps not surprisingly, we were contacted shortly afterwards by someone from Shortfall.co.uk who stressed that their policies *did not* include such a Market Value clause and they requested that we updated our report to reflect this.
We are pleased to have assisted Shortfall.co.uk by pointing out the confusion within their wordings and are further pleased to see the quick action they took not only to discuss the matter with us, but also to get their policy wordings amended to remove the confusion and clarify their position in this regard.
It is commendable that they addressed the issue with their policy wordings so promptly. We are happy to have our report reflect that their policies do not incorporate a Market Value clause, we welcome them to the online GAP insurance market and look forward to some healthy competition between us.
Of course, them attempting to make their policies as good as ours (they’ve elected to use the same underwriter and claim administrator too – what can we say, replication is supposed to be the greatest form of flattery – is it not?), makes our life that bit more difficult in terms of justifying why you should buy GAP insurance from us instead of them. That being said however, aside from how our policies compare to theirs, we’re pretty confident that we’re better looking that they are and we think that’s as good a reason as any, isn’t it?