Embed
Email

Direct No

Document Sample

Shared by: yunyi
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
0
posted:
12/10/2011
language:
pages:
6
ABI Motor Conference

Tuesday 22nd November

Keith Morris, Chairman, Sabre

Chairman, ABI Motor Committee









Introduction





Good afternoon everyone. I hope you enjoyed your lunch and found this

morning‟s sessions interesting and informative. This morning Otto outlined five

priority areas for the industry to deliver a better deal for consumers.





Otto rightly placed his speech in the present, tackling the issues at the top of the

industry‟s agenda, and the key priorities he identified certainly resonate with me.





Before I talk specifically about two of these issues – whiplash and application

fraud; I want first, as Chairman of the ABI Motor Committee, to offer a sense of

perspective of the challenges the industry has faced over the last two decades.





Challenges for Motor Insurers over the last 20 years





In the early 1990s, we saw a rapid increase in theft claims as a result of the

recession. Perhaps akin to the “grab what you can” culture emerging now.





Toward the end of the 1990s, we experienced under-reserving as a result of new

Ogden tables and a discount rate review.





The last decade, was punctuated by the introduction of the „no win no fee‟ system

which caused a dramatic increase in the number of personal injury claims. This

paved the way for the inadequate and dysfunctional compensation system we are

urgently seeking to reform today.





In the middle of the last decade, we dealt with a rapid increase in credit hire costs,

something that continues to plague the industry.





And from the end of the last decade through to today, we have been challenged

again this time by a rapid increase in fraudulent behaviour. Namely, application

and whiplash fraud.





These challenges are compounded for an industry that has consistently made an

underwriting loss for each of the past sixteen years; and one whose businesses

and consumers are feeling the effects of the global economic crisis.





As insurers, it is our role to accurately price the risk within the chaos, and offer

protection to our consumers in the event of misfortune.





What underwriters look for is stability, as this allows them to price appropriately.





The challenges of the last twenty years have not lead to stability and instability

usually leads to losses and often an over-reaction in terms of rate increases.





Whiplash Claims





With regard to today‟s challenge of the boom in whiplash claims, it is ultimately

society that has to decide what it wants.





If society wants people who say they have suffered whiplash to be compensated

without objective proof of an injury being presented, then, providing we can reach

a steady state where underwriters will just price accordingly, the consequence will

be high premiums that may price some individuals off the roads.









2

If, as I am sure many in this room agree, society wants to minimise unnecessary

cost and pay genuine claimants quickly and effectively, then we must eradicate

spurious whiplash claims.





Insurers know that a significant proportion of whiplash claims presented are at

best exaggerated and are at worst fraudulent.





However, as the current benchmark for medical evidence when making a claim is

very low and the incentive for securing a whiplash diagnosis is so high, it is little

surprise that we have become as Otto mentioned this morning, the whiplash

capital of Europe.









In his 10 minute bill, Jack Straw has suggested that whiplash should not be

compensated unless the crash velocity exceeds 15 mph. The former Justice

Secretary has also suggested reversing the burden of proof to put the emphasis

on the claimant to prove they have whiplash. The issue with the 15mph, is how

the impact speed is determined; this notwithstanding, 15 mph does seem rather

too high to me.





The issue with reversing the burden of proof, is that if we cannot prove objectively

that whiplash has not occurred, then how can a claimant prove objectively that it

has?





It seems to me that a middle ground is required. Maybe that middle ground is an

objective test that the courts accept, and yes, that includes areas where claims

are prolific, like Birkenhead.





It is likely that the elimination of referral fees will have an impact on stemming the

growth in whiplash claims as it can be no coincidence that the incidence of

whiplash is highest where claims management companies are flourishing.









3

The least credible claims management companies thrive because they encourage

people, who do not have whiplash but who have some pretext for contending that

they do to put forward a claim.





And I‟m sure that many in the audience will have received a text offering a quick

and easy £3500 to pursue a claim for an accident that most likely never occurred

in the first place.









I am hopeful that the ban on referral fees will mean the end of the worst of these

practices. However, without further measures, such as those I described

previously, this will not eliminate dubious whiplash claims entirely.





Application Fraud





The other area I wanted to talk about is application fraud, where the industry is

working hard to obviate as much of this as possible.





There is clear evidence that some applicants are lying to insurers about a number

of different parameters.





In extreme cases this might include the applicant‟s age. However, false

information about the number of previous claims and convictions, such as points

for speeding and where the vehicle is kept, are unfortunately all too common.





I haven‟t come across an applicant falsifying their gender yet, but as we rarely see

the policyholder these days, it wouldn‟t be surprising. Perhaps a positive

unintended consequence of the otherwise odious European Court of Justice ruling

on gender will make this a moot point anyway.





So what are we doing?









4

First, as Otto touched on briefly this morning, we are working with the Department

for Transport and the DVLA to gain access to driver licence information.





Among other things, this will tell us the drivers‟ age, driving entitlement, date

licence passed and conviction history and will provide a basic form of identity

check.





Second, we are restructuring the CUE database to make it more complete and to

enable its use at point of quote to give a comprehensive claims history.





And third, we are looking at the prospect of an electronic method of confirming No

Claims Discounts.





Consequently, it should be possible to get much of the information required for a

motor quotation from trusted sources rather than request it from the proposer.

Naturally, there is a lot of work to do before we achieve all of this, but we are

already making progress.





Concluding remarks





While these three actions outline what we are doing, ultimately we must measure

success by the quality of the outcome.





If we can reduce exaggerated and fraudulent whiplash claims then premiums will

reduce.





If we can reduce application fraud, premiums for honest policyholders will reduce.





We cannot allow the legitimate many to pay the price for the opportunistic and

fraudulent few. Particularly in a climate where spending is tight, fuel prices are

rising, and motoring forms such a crucial lynchpin in millions of consumers daily

lives.









5

If, as I suspect, action to tackle whiplash and application fraud creates a more

stable environment, underwriters can be confident that the prices they are

charging are correct.





In turn, this will increase the prospect of a more profitable market with fewer price

swings.





It is unfortunate that Mike Penning is not able to be with us today but I am very

grateful to John Woodcock, the Shadow Transport Minister, for agreeing at such

short notice to provide our first keynote address this afternoon. The industry

worked closely with Jim Fitzpatrick, former Parliamentary Under-Secretary of

State at the Department of Transport, and we enjoyed a close working relationship

with his Administration when Labour was in office.





So we look forward to working with John Woodcock over the years ahead, to

show that we are playing our part as an industry, are an intrinsic part of British life

and determined to improve our offering to our customers.





And I‟m looking forward to hearing what John Woodcock has to say especially in

relation to his proposals around “work journeys only” car insurance policies.





I hope you find the breakouts and plenary sessions on costs to the industry

insightful and topical and I will now hand you back to Susanna to introduce the

Shadow Transport Minister.





Thank you.









6



Related docs
Other docs by yunyi
FHO135HAFJELL10
Views: 6  |  Downloads: 0
fb_stats.doc - FHSAA.org
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
o07809
Views: 7  |  Downloads: 0
GPS-6010-X5--Manual-E
Views: 17  |  Downloads: 0
Guide of Documentation
Views: 6  |  Downloads: 0
THE PROFIT CONNECTION
Views: 56  |  Downloads: 0
3 cp u9 inheritance notes.ppt - shssci
Views: 4  |  Downloads: 0
RELEASE
Views: 6  |  Downloads: 0
Quantum Servicing Receives 'Best
Views: 8  |  Downloads: 0
The fine print
Views: 7  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!