FSC to update Code of Practice with consumer feedback

Consumer representatives will now be involved in the development of the Life Insurance Code of Practice after questions were raised about the life insurance sector's ability to self-regulate, FSC chief executive Sally Loane announced today.

In opening the FSC Life Insurance Conference Ms Loane said that the change was made to strengthen consumer protections in the code.

"In order to ensure consumer protections are even stronger, we have added a steering group to our code development process which will include consumer representatives, the Financial Rights Legal Centre and the Consumer Action Law Centre, as well as senior life insurance executives," she said.

"The consumer representatives will work closely with our members to identify where we need to strengthen consumer protections in our code."

The Life Insurance Code of Practice is set to be implemented by 1 July 2016. Compliance will be monitored by an independent committee of experts, including a consumer representative, Ms Loane said.

While the draft code as it stands today is a "robust document, with good consumer protections," it may need to be updated with feedback from consumer representatives, she said.

"We won't rush out with something that's underdone, however we recognise the imperative of getting our code in place sooner rather than later.

"The code has always been an important part of our commitment as an industry to strengthen community trust and confidence in life insurance," she said.

"We have a responsibility to be a more customer-centric industry than we have been in the past."

Ms Loane acknowledge that people had been "let down and trust had been damaged" and said that institutions had attempted to rectify this.

"I deeply regret this has happened. We are working hard with all of our members to rebuild trust and confidence in life insurance.

Many of our members have moved quickly to instigate their own internal reviews, particularly into denied claims and policy definitions," she said.

Ms Loane also said that it was looking at ways to better manage the experience of "vulnerable consumers" who may have difficulty buying insurance or making a claim.

"This could include identifying and supporting people suffering from mental illness, elderly customers, those who require the use of an interpreter, people living in remote communities, or those customers with very low levels of literacy," Ms Loane said.

Add comment


Security code
Refresh

Comments   

 
+4 #6 Ashamed ! 2016-03-16 17:24
"let down and trust has been damaged'

Don't expect any sympathy from the small business financial advisers whose lives you destroyed

Enjoy your bonus's !
Quote
 
 
+3 #5 TD 2016-03-16 14:00
Window dressing and self interest on display at its finest.
Quote
 
 
+3 #4 Reality 2016-03-16 13:47
Hannah, certainly isn't a waste of money but your comment does prove how effective this fear mongering clearly is on the general population.
Quote
 
 
+3 #3 David from Perth 2016-03-16 13:02
Seem like people justifying their own existence.
Quote
 
 
+2 #2 Nobby Kleinman 2016-03-16 12:05
Had any of those member companies been advisers, they would have been strung up and castrated and demoralised in front of the whole community.
There are two rules at play here. One for the companies who profess apologies and it won't happen again because they are undertaking internal reviews, and those rules which apply to advisers.
The fines imposed on offices are negligible because consumers are paying any fines or penalties imposed, not those in management who are ultimately responsible.
This result is totally unacceptable and the companies should all be apologising to consumer and advisers.
Again, mindless fools steering a sinking ship hell bent on generating profits instead of trust.
Quote
 
 
-4 #1 Hannah 2016-03-16 10:55
There's a lot of work to be done. Frankly at present you are wasting your money buying disability and trauma cover because insurers find it too easy to impose their own interpretations on the illnesses being claimed on in order to protect their profits. Who wants a two year court battle in order to claim under a policy that promises payouts for illness and trauma because the insurer is too keen on higher profits and bonuses for its execs to pay out a legitimate claim?
Quote
 

Feature Video

Latest Blogs

key-budget-changes-for-businesses

Key budget changes for businesses

Peter Bembrick: Small businesses in particular should benefit from these changes, which include: Company tax rate reduction Over the next decade, the company tax rate will be reduced to...More >>
robo-advice-it-s-not-about-us

Robo-advice – it’s not about us

Duncan McPherson: Sadly, it appears that the vast majority of comments are from a developer's or competitor's perspective, with very few focusing on the customer. My concern was...More >>
regime-change-why-advice-rules-must-be-unified

Regime change: Why advice rules must be unified

Philippa Sheehan: I think most of us can agree that for all its foibles, the AFSL regime is a vast improvement on all previous attempts to regulate...More >>

Latest Comments