A whitepaper shows that 56 per cent of respondents stated they were “unwilling to pay anything for life insurance advice”.
It also found 72 per cent of respondents would be confident in purchasing a life insurance or income protection product online and without financial advice if the right resources were available.
NobleOak chief executive Anthony Brown said consumer buying behaviour is quickly evolving.
“In reality, we find many customers still like to talk to someone about life insurance and help them to apply,” Mr Brown said.
“While it may still be a while before this personal contact is replaced, there is no doubt we are in the middle of a significant shift in consumer behaviour.”
The whitepaper, titled ‘Life Insurance in Australia – Consumer Behaviour Transformation’, was based on a study conducted in December last year by research firm Pureprofile.
Over 1,000 Australian adults between 30 and 60 years old were asked about their research and buying behaviour with respect to financial services products.
In October last year, Mr Brown said customers with life insurance policies attained through advisers are “not getting good value for money” when compared to direct policies.
“We do think the industry is broken at the moment. It does need fixing and I know there are big changes but, if you go through advisers, you’re not getting good value for money,” Mr Brown said.
“A lot of direct opportunities are great value for money, and lapse rates are high.”
The LIF changes should work out well for consumers and advisers then
Noble Oak like the other direct insurers sell junk, over priced insurance, have poor practices and ultimately will pay less claims.
The issue we have though is that this article is right in that most customers do no want to pay for risk advice.
However risk advice is in every way better than the dodgy practices of Noble Oak and the other direct insurers.
The problem therefore is simple. The con job done by the crooked FSC cartel together with a weak AFA and FPA will leave customers with less choice other than to go directly to the junk insurers like Noble Oak.
This is exactly what the crooked FSC and the dodgy direct insurers like Noble Oak want. Charge higher premiums, offer only basic cover and underwrite at claim time so that they will pay less claims.
Exactly. Well said.
And while consumer practices are changing in every area with more information available, why don’t these direct insurers sell decent policies? Because ultimately they want the premiums and don’t want to pay claims.
Ultimately, with all the dramas these dodgy direct insurers will cause will blow up in their own face and the government too. Kelly Odwyer should be held responsible for all the poor families that lives get destroyed when their dodgy direct insurance policy fails to pay out. Odwyer, you are a disgrace and a bank / FSC crony.
Funny how Noble Oak makes claims like this and that Advisers are bad bit then users Direct Sales Companies to sell their product without giving any advice so they can just make money; this is why we have so much underinsurance in this country, letting “Carpet Baggers” try and rule the market.
There is a very simple solution for all of the IFA’s in Australia just do not write anything onto the NobleOak book of business which incidentally was founded by a guy who encouraged advisers to write his product which was good.
Just stop writing onto the NobleOak book and when the staff changes occur attitudes to advisers will change.
It is very easy and will have an immediate result. Let’s see what happens
It’s interesting to ponder how much of this perception from consumers has been driven by the decade long advertising from Union Super Funds. As IFA’s we all know that ‘advised’ insurance cover is most cases better quality, with lower premiums compared to either ‘Direct’ or ‘Group’ insurance cover (for anything more than the basic default levels). I guess the challenge is for advisers to communicate and advertise this to the general public to counter some of the misconceptions out there. I don’t see that there is anything wrong with me receiving a commission for the service I provide customers when I can select from all quality insurers in the marketplace, I can provide better cover, with wider coverage, targeted at the areas that clients want (as opposed to what they think they need), at a lower cost and still get paid by the insurer for delivering all these benefits to the client.
I could not agree with you more Jimmy. The only distractions to our efforts today are coming from within the industry (and Union Funds) from individuals and groups with their own agendas. When they all go away and leave us alone, we can get on with expressing the talents that only the likes you and I have i.e. Giving appropriate advice to clients and getting paid as we should. By the way, where are all these disgruntled consumers? I have met only 1 or 2 over the last 20 years.