We need to be able to trust insurers

Insurance

11 December 2020

Two cheers for the Government’s new reform plan aimed at bringing down the cost of insurance. Not three because, in one major respect, the changes are somewhat one-sided.

At a press conference to launch it yesterday, Enterprise Minister Leo Varadkar acknowledged that insurance costs in Ireland are too high for consumers, businesses, and community organisations. Yet the plan fails to acknowledge the contribution to those costs made by the huge profits enjoyed by insurance companies in Ireland. According to Central Bank figures, insurers operating here saw profits on motor coverage go up by nine percent to €142m last year.

The cost of claims has fallen to 59% of motor premiums from a peak of 92% in 2014, yet any reduction in costs to consumers has been piecemeal and inadequate.

Insurers point out that awards are much higher here than in the UK but neglect to admit that their operating profits are almost double that of their British counterparts.

It is right that exaggerated and misleading insurance claims should face the full force of the law. However, it should also be made clear to the insurance industry that sharp practices, a failure to be open and transparent on pricing structures, or operating as a cartel in order to enhance profits will not be tolerated.

There are already two investigations at EU level into suspected anti-competitive practices in the Irish insurance industry, one by the European Commission and another by the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (CCPC). The CCPC case, taken at the request of the Irish Government, involves an investigation into five insurers, an insurance broker, and an insurance industry trade association. Preliminary findings indicate that the parties involved engaged in a practice known as “price signalling”, a practice designed to reduce competition.

To date, reform of the sector has been at the behest of the industry itself and not consumers. The creation of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board was meant to drive down both awards and legal costs. In fact, awards through PIAB have been only marginally lower than those awarded in the courts or settled out of court.

The insurance industry is built on trust. Customers pay their premium and trust the insurer to pay their claim. Insurers trust customers to be honest and forthright in their dealings with them. But, unfortunately, trust cannot be taken for granted which is why it is necessary to have legislation to reduce fraudulent claims, including placing perjury on a statutory footing to make it easier to prosecute.

While Leo Varadkar’s plan pledges to increase protection for consumers, it mostly concerns itself with reducing the costs of insurance providers by promising to bring in new guidelines on personal injury awards and consider capping them, enhancing the role of PIAB, and reducing claims fraud.

Like other reform plans before, this one is again loaded in favour of the industry, while doing little to force insurance companies to deal with their customers fairly, ethically, openly, and honestly.

Irish Examiner

Follow us for the latest updates & news

Recent News

Autistic cinema manager wins €12k over discrimination in roster row

An autistic cinema manager who quit when his employer was unable to guarantee him two days off in a row following a months-long dispute over rostering arrangements has secured €12,000 in compensation for disability discrimination. The complainant's wife gave evidence...

Northern Ireland exam board boss wins £100,000 settlement

Northern Ireland’s Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) has paid a substantial settlement to its former interim chief executive who complained of sex, race and age discrimination and constructive dismissal. The sum paid to Margaret Farragher,...

Recent Articles

Psychological Injury

Nervous Shock I The law allows recovery of damages for so called nervous shock, within certain parameters and subject to limitations.  Nervous shock is the most commonly used legal label for psychiatric or psychological injury. Psychiatric injuries include...

Public Authorities and Negligence

Powers and Duties In broad terms, public authorities are subject to civil liability for negligence and other civil wrongs, in the same way as private individuals and companies.  The State and other public bodies are responsible for the actions and omissions of...

Duty of Care (Part 2)

Limits to Neighbour Principle The famous neighbour principle re-stated the general basis of liability in negligence. It stated, that “you must take reasonable care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your...

Duty of Care (Part 1)

Meaning of Negligence I Negligence is used in a number of senses.  In one sense, it refers to a person’s state of mind.  An act is negligent, where it is done without giving due weight to the risks involved.  A person  (and his state of mind) may...

Join our Panel

You May Also Like...