I insured my car with 1st Central for the first time this year and I will not be returning or recommending them to anyone else - in fact I would actively discourage people from insuring with them. They accused me of providing them with incorrect information via the comparison site that I found their policy through and tried to charge me to make a change to the policy! They were very unhelpful and if it wasn't for me being confident in my challenge they would have taken advantage of me. If I was a vulnerable person, I'd have had no hope. While they are completely within their rights to conduct vigorous validity checks, their checks are far greater than any other insurer I've been with. So much so, that I got the sense that they were actively trying to find reasons to find fault with the information I had provided so that they could charge me for the privilege of making a change to my policy information. I would be intrigued to know how many policy information changes they initiate compared to other insurers and how much of their revenue is generated from this practise. In my case, the challenge concerned the question 'when did you buy the car?' I bought the car around 10 years ago, so this is how I answered the question on the comparison site. However, my ex boyfriend was the registered keeper for most of that period, and I only became the registered keeper two years ago. They said that my answer around 'buying' the car was wrong because they actually wanted to know when I had become the registered keeper. I might even add that on the V5C document it distinctly says 'this is not proof of ownership - it shows who is responsible for registering and taxing the vehicle'. They then proceeded to blame the comparison site saying that they didn't have any control over the questions they asked and that they categorically would not waive the policy change fee. I'm sorry, but if you're paying a comparison site to acquire new business you have an obligation to ensure that you're aligned in the way you are interpreting the questions and answers. And certainly not charge people for the administration it takes to get the information right post-quote! I do also appreciate that my case may not be 'typical', but some understanding on 1st Central's part would have gone a long way. Ultimately it wasn't my fault that this information was perceived by them to be incorrect. I'd answered the question to the best of my ability. They did eventually concede (after some difficult and stressful phone calls) and waived the administration fee, but still charged me for the premium increase caused by the updated information. I begrudgingly paid it, but ultimately I shouldn't have been charged given that as far as I was concerned their price advertised on the comparison website was correct according to the information I had entered. They just wanted to squeeze every penny out of me and had no concern for my customer experience. This experience also completely diminished any faith that I had in them to actually insure my car. If I'd had an accident I can only imagine the holes I would have had to have jumped through in order to have claimed. I've now cancelled my policy and I'm with another insurer whom I trust.