James Moore: Consumers should be very wary about comparison sites

Compare the Market? It’s starting to look like compare the muck-up, at least if Which? is to be believed.

Having cross-checked the motor policy descriptions for 21 insurance brands on four popular price comparison sites against the info provided by insurers it drew some troubling conclusions. There was, it said, at least one discrepancy in six out of every 10 of the policies its researchers checked. Some of them were rather significant, ranging from the level of cover being offered to whether a courtesy car would be available in the event of a prang.

Sites like to portray themselves as the consumer’s best pal, with cheery ads and cutesy characters; meerkats, tubby opera singers and so on.

They can be when they work. They have helped inject a little competitive spice into markets in sore need of it; credit cards, loans and especially energy, as well as insurance.

But the Which? report suggests all is not well with the way they work, and the trouble is we have been here before. Repeatedly.

Back in 2014 the Financial Conduct Authority fired a shot across the industry’s bows, saying some sites operating in the general insurance sector “are failing to meet consumers expectations of them and, in some cases, regulatory standards”.

The Competition & Markets Authority, meanwhile, wrapped up an investigation last year that found the sector doesn’t always work in the interests of consumers. A disciplinary probe, reportedly focused on Compare the Market, is ongoing.

You’d think the interest of those two would have been enough to drive the point home to wary consumers, but apparently not. Perhaps one of those watchdogs needs to force the sites to play compare the penalty.