|        About Good Returns  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  RSS Feeds

NZ's Financial Adviser News Centre

GR Logo
Last Article Uploaded: Tuesday, May 17th, 8:01PM


Latest Headlines

Churn report due in mid-2016

The Financial Markets Authority expects to have a report on its investigation into churn in the insurance industry available by the middle of the year.

Wednesday, March 16th 2016, 6:00AM 2 Comments

by Susan Edmunds

Andrew Park

The authority wrote to 12 insurance companies last year asking for data on all new policies written in the past five years, including policyholder details, adviser details and commission payments.

It also included a questionnaire asking what the premium levels would be if churn was reduced and the claims experience of replacement business.

That was in May and there has been little discussion of the investigation since.

FMA spokesman Andrew Park said work continued.

“We are completing our analysis of the information we received and expect to make a report available in the middle of the year.”

Tags: Churn

« Kepa not keeping regional rolesCourt battle costs broker everything »

Special Offers

Comments from our readers

On 29 March 2016 at 12:04 pm Majella said:
I trust the FMA will seek some input on its conclusions from the affected - the insurers. Otherwise, it could be another MWJ fiasco.
On 1 April 2016 at 11:13 am interested2 said:
When the FMA report is written, it will be interesting to see how FMA addresses issues beyond the adviser I.e. let’s assume everything had a level 25% commission (and soft dollar was banned), as these large companies seek to increase their market share, would, or how would, the issues that affect the consumer change?

E.g. how an individual should balance their future potential outcomes/ claims scenarios. You’d understand that a client could be better staying on an existing policy due to the development of now ‘pre-existing conditions’, but they may be offered new cover that is attractive if the policy wording is more broad, even if they accept an exclusion.

Who is to know if there will be a claim under the new broader wording, or claim declined because of the exclusion? And, is the important piece here that the consumer knew about that risk, OR that they didn’t eventually suffer as a result of taking that risk?

Sign In to add your comment



Printable version  


Email to a friend
Insurance Briefs

Partners first life company to cloud platform
Partners Life completes first stage of the company's claims transformation journey.

Celebrating Earth Day
Insurer takes early step on sustainability journey.

Fidelity Life launches new-look claims content
Fidelity rolls out education material to help explain insurance.

Health insurer response times balloon out
Accuro says its response times have become much longer as it implements a new system.

News Bites
Latest Comments
  • Brian Gaynor dies
    “RIP - a true icon and such a humble person who helped so many....”
    2 days ago by p simone
  • Brian Gaynor dies
    “Very sad. Condolences to him family....”
    2 days ago by
  • Brian Gaynor dies
    “Brian was someone you would always go and listen to if he was presenting at a seminar or conference, someone you would always...”
    2 days ago by MikeBeuvink
  • Brian Gaynor dies
    “A true champion of the industry. My sincere condolences to family, colleagues and friends. ...”
    2 days ago by Pragmatic
  • [GRTV] AIA rolls out direct life insurance plans
    “Thanks Lifeadviser1, and it is great to see you have been having a play in the system. You are right, in the original...”
    2 days ago by Sam.Tremethick
Subscribe Now

Cover Notes - Specific news aimed at risk advisers

Previous News
Most Commented On
About Us  |  Advertise  |  Contact Us  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy  |  RSS Feeds  |  Letters  |  Archive  |  Toolbox  |  Disclaimer
Site by Web Developer and