M M writes: Having just bought her first car, my daughter used gocompare.com to find the best car insurance deal. Budget Insurance appeared good with an annual premium of about £420. She answered the questions honestly, saying she had three years’ claim-free driving experience. Budget then wrote to her a fortnight later asking for confirmation of her no-claims discount. However, she had previously been driving my company car (insured for any driver over the age of 18) so was not able to supply this. The company responded by taking an extra £400plus out of her bank account. She then used another search engine (where the questions were clearer) stating explicitly that she had no previous insurance of her own, and was still able to obtain quotes around the £420-£450 mark, and therefore tried to cancel her Budget policy. The company’s response was to say that if she wanted to cancel she would only receive back £450 out of the total of £840, despite the fact she had only been insured with the company for one month and one day. This seems like a rip-off.

Initially, this seemed an innocent mistake on the part of your daughter coupled with imprecise questions posed by the web site. I was all set to throw myself (and you) on the mercy of Budget, pleading a misunderstanding and hoping that, from the goodness of its heart (and in the interest of good customer relations) it would refund rather more of its charge for cancelling a policy early.

It took some digging to establish that while your daughter was indeed innocent, she was not mistaken. The guilty party, so to speak, was Budget itself. It had recently reviewed its processes “in a bid to reflect customers’ claim-free driving experience”. But it evidently did not have your daughter’s situation in mind when it did this, and although it never meant to give people like her a discount, its own systems led her into this trap. As Budget puts it: “This particular case has highlighted almost immediately that there are some circumstances where the processes in place do not adequately qualify the customer’s eligibility for discount.”

The company has decided to honour the original quote and refund the difference “as a gesture of goodwill”. I’m not so sure about the “goodwill” bit, as the company admits its own processes were at fault. Nevertheless the money is real. Meanwhile, the company is making sure no one else is misled in the same manner.

Debt collectors are after me

DH writes: I am writing about a wrongly billed charge for £594 by British Gas. I bought a property in February 2006 for my daughter to live in and share. The accounts were never in my name and there was much confusion which I thought had been sorted until about a year ago when I was suddenly billed for this sum. Since then it has gone from one debt collection agency to another – I am currently on the fourth agency. I live in Portugal and am worried that if it does go to court and I am not there to defend myself, I will automatically lose.

I don’t know all the ins and outs of this, which both you and British Gas have spared me. However, the end result is satisfactory in that the company has agreed that in view of the confusion and length of time this has taken to sort out, the bill will be waived in its entirety. BG assures me you will not get any further letters requesting payment.

How to find a missing company

GG writes: Can you help me trace Reece Plc? I have had about 12,500 shares in the company for some 16 years but have had no communications in the past six years. I can find no trace of them.

Sometimes the easiest (and laziest) option is the best: I googled Reece Plc and immediately came up with the information that the company went into compulsory liquidation on 10 February 2003. A few more clicks of the mouse yielded the information that it was formally dissolved on December 30, 2003, and that HM Revenue & Customs accepted that the shares were of “negligible value” for capital gains tax purposes in March 2003.

For more information on “lost” company shares, try the free Webcheck Service on companieshouse.gov.uk or call 0870 333 3636. If you suspect the company has gone into liquidation, look at the HMRC website – go to hmrc.gov.uk/cgt/negvalist.htm.

You can also try contacting the company’s registrars (as noted on dividend slips). I know you did this, but the firm in question no longer existed. These days there are only three firms of registrars, Equiniti (0871 384 2030), Computershare (0870 702 0003) and Capita IRG (0870 162 3100).

1% interest paid? I’m not that stupid

BB writes: For several years I have invested £3,500 in a series of one-year bonds with Portman building society. In October 2006, I went to reinvest the money and a Portman employee advised me to put it into an Over 60s one-year, annual income bond. I did. A year later on maturity I was paid interest of £44.47. I had been expecting £189. I eventually received a letter saying that this bond required a minimum investment of £5,000, and so I was only entitled to interest of a little over 1%. This had not been mentioned. I would hardly have been likely to invest at 1% a year.

Nationwide (which has taken over the Portman) accepts you were not given the right advice. Whether this was due to a misunderstanding on your part or the adviser’s – or whether he simply didn’t get his facts right – I don’t know. The important thing is that Nationwide agrees you should be recompensed. It is sending a cheque for £150.63, representing the balance of interest due had your investment qualified for this bond, together with £25 by way of an apology.

NatWest gets a third-class degree

BM writes: My son opened a student account with NatWest last September. By mistake, the bank opened a graduate account for him. This was eventually put right but by then it was too late for him to apply for the Student Railcard.

This would have been a comedy of errors, except I doubt that you, your wife or your son – all of you having been involved one way and another in trailing round NatWest branches or call centres in an effort to sort this out – have found anything remotely funny about it.

NatWest says it has now arranged for a railcard to be issued directly to your son, and it is also adding in £100 as a gesture of goodwill in recognition of its failings both in this respect, and in respect of the action the bank took (or rather, didn’t take) when your son lost his bank card just before Christmas. Hopefully, his banking life will run more smoothly now.

E-mail Diana Wright at the address below (no attachments please) or write to A Question of Money, The Sunday Times, 1 Pennington Street, London E98 1ST, giving a daytime telephone number. We cannot send personal replies or deal with every letter. Please do not send original documents or SAEs. Advice is offered without legal responsibility

questionofmoney@sunday-times.co.uk

Explore Money

• Property & Mortgages

• Savings

• Borrowing

• Investment

• Funds

• Insurance

• Consumer Affairs

• Tax

• Pensions

• Broadband