Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
moneymanagement logo
 
 

No need for independent claims body

FSC/life-insurance/claims/claims-handling/ASIC/

31 March 2017
| By Jassmyn |
image
image image
expand image

The life insurance claims process should be simple and informative enough and an independent body to assess claims is not needed, a panel believes.

Speaking at the Financial Services Council’s (FSC’s) Life Insurance conference on Thursday, Financial Rights Legal Centre principal solicitor, Alexandra Kelly said an additional layer of assistance for claims would add more confusion to consumers.

“For a consumer, what is the role of what party? Are you an advocate? An information provider? Who will fund them? There’s too many complexities will be added into in respect of creating such an entity,” Kelly said.

“The claims process should be an in-house process that should be so simple anyone could do it. It shouldn’t be at a point where the claims form is so difficult, confusing, and upsetting that claimants need support for that. If they do need support why can’t the insurer provide that support? So that message should be clear about what the insurer wants rather than creating an additional layer of an entity.”

Kelly said consumers would not buy into an industry scheme as it would be seen as another avenue of trying to discourage consumers to make a claim.

“If a consumer goes along to this entity and they say ‘no we don’t think you can make a claim’ the consumer will still want advice from someone independent to ask ‘is that right?’ and then we would get into more confusion from the consumer,” she said.

“We should be focusing on getting to a point where the claims process is so informative and consumers are assisted along the way so that they understand that ‘no, I’m not entitled to a claim and I understand the reasons why’ or ‘I am entitled and I completely understand where I’m at with my obligation’. I think that should be directed for the insurers themselves.”

Also speaking on the panel, the corporate regulator’s deputy chair, Peter Kell said if insurers adhered to all the requirements set out in the Code of Practice, and adhered not only to the technical side but also the spirit and the principles set out, and avoided defaulting to the expectation provisions as far as possible, then consumers would not feel the need to go to lawyers so often.

“That ought to be one of the aims of the code to improve consumer experience. Too often it is nowhere near as good as it should be,” he said.

Read more about:

AUTHOR

Recommended for you

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

The succession dilemma is more than just a matter of commitments.This isn’t simply about younger vs. older advisers. It’...

2 days 1 hour ago

Significant ethical issues there. If a relationship is in the process of breaking down then both parties are likely to b...

3 weeks 5 days ago

It's not licensees not putting them on, it's small businesses (that are licensed) that cannot afford to put them on. The...

1 month ago

After last month’s surprise hold, the Reserve Bank of Australia has announced its latest interest rate decision....

4 weeks ago

ASIC has released the results of the latest adviser exam, with August’s pass mark improving on the sitting from a year ago. ...

4 days 19 hours ago

While the profession continues to see consolidation at the top, Adviser Ratings has compared the business models of Insignia and Entireti and how they are shaping the pro...

1 week 6 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND