I accept what you are saying BankFodder and did put forward all the logical arguments as to why this was not reasonable, but although the person I spoke to understood my point of view they (Hastings Direct) were still not prepared to move and stated that I was bound by the T&Cs. How can it possibly be correct/ethical to have to pay insurance for an item that no longer exists? I really do hate insurance companies! JonCris, I also take your point. However, recently (unfortunately) my dog passed away. I was paying pet insurance by instalments for the dog, these payments stopped immediately. (sorry for hijacking your thread Bazaar!)

Thanks for your prompt reply. I have contacted the insurance company and queried this again. They repeated what I said earlier. They quoted T&Cs of my policy and said I have to settle the full amount of my policy, even though the vehicle for which it applies has been written off. They said I am still insured with them until the end of the policy term. If (when) I get a replacement car, they suggest I contact them and they will adjust the policy for the new vehicle spec. People should take note of this when they are offered a settlement figure for a car that has been written off...they still have to pay the remainder of their motor insurance policy. These are the small print 'catches' that the insurance companies employ to reduce THEIR risk.

Well, I managed to write-off my car in early January (my Fault...skidded on ice). The insurance company have informed me that I HAVE to continue making payments to my policy until the end of its term. This means I am continuing to pay insurance for a car that I no longer have until May of this year. When I queried this with the company, they told me this was 'normal'. By the way I was paid an adequate valuation amount for the car.