orangeblock

Plain English could save insurers millions

25 August 2010 | Intermediaries / Brokers | General | Gareth Stokes

The country would save billions if corporations kept things simple. Imagine the saving in time and effort if the Consumer Protection Act (CPA) “simple English” requirement existed a couple of decades ago. From 24 October you’ll no longer have to spend hours trawling through policy wordings and product brochures – trusted industry dictionary by your side – to understand what you’re selling. The Act requires that all documentation that the insurer provides to consumers must be written in plain language. And – to keep insurers honest – these “simple English” provisions cannot be deemed unjust or unfair.

Christelle Fourie, managing director of MUA Insurance Acceptances, says that while this is a welcome development to ensure consumers fully understand the fine print of their insurance policies, it also poses some serious challenges for the insurance industry. As someone who frequently reports on products in the short-term, long-term and healthcare industries I often wonder whether product providers are capable of the English the Act requires...

Another costly compliance exercise

The main concern raised by industry stakeholders is the time and expense incurred in complying with the new Act. Fourie observes: “Rewriting all documentation is both an expensive and time consuming process for insurers, and if an insurance company does not fully comply then clients will have recourse to legal action in the even their claims are repudiated.” Sections of the Act are also open to wide interpretation. The courts are going to have to decide whether an ordinary consumer with average literacy skills and minimal experience as a consumer of insurance services can be expected to understand the content, significance and import of the document.

It seems simple enough, doesn’t it? But what qualifies as an “ordinary” consumer? How does one determine “average literacy skills”? Does the Act mean someone who can read the “Dick and Jane” books doing the rounds during my first grade – or the Reader’s Digest copy you’d expect the average Grade 10 learner to comprehend? And finally – how will the court interpret “minimal experience” in purchasing insurance products? They could mean someone with “no” experience of insurance – or someone who’s bought life cover as part of a housing transaction. The reality is neither of these consumers has the experience the Act refers to. In their attempts to protect consumers lawmakers have introduced reams of ambiguity, injecting clouds of uncertainty into the transparent environment they’re trying to create.

And they’re making it far riskier for insurers to do business. “In addition to the time, effort and cost of drawing up reams of new paperwork, there is also an increased risk on the part of the insurer,” says Fourie. They’ll spend more time in court defending actions and will end up paying claims on events which weren’t priced in at the underwriting stage.

Exclusions no longer a “failsafe” for insurers

Insurers who rely on exclusion clauses to underwrite at claims stage are in for some unpleasant surprises too. The CPA stipulates that exclusions limiting the liability of the insurer must be drawn to the attention of the consumer when the policy is sold. The requirement, once again, is for plain “easy to understand” language… Courts will have sweeping powers to determine whether these rules are just and fair, and in the event they’re not could void the insurers’ decisions on certain claims.

Financial services intermediaries will have to keep on their toes too. Section 22 of the CPA, for examples, stipulates that all correspondence and documentation between the insurer (and insurance broker) and the policyholder must be in plain language. “Many brokers have their own wording for the documentation they provide to clients,” notes Fourie. “As a result, they will also be responsible for ensuring that all paperwork that they prepare for clients complies with the new legislation.” These brokers would have to up their liability insurance to accommodate the new regulations.

The “just in time” theory still holds

With approximately 60 days to the 24 October implementation most insurers should be well on their way to reviewing their policy documents. Unfortunately the world of legislation and business don’t always intersect. At a time when the bulk of the work should be complete we learned that the National Consumer Commission would soon “publish guidelines regarding how to determine whether a document satisfies the plain language requirements”. Fourie believes insurers should wait for this document before rushing out to make changes. We reckon you might want to get your changes done – and use the document as a final check – when it surfaces.

Editor’s thoughts: At first glance we dismissed the Consumer Protection Act as an overzealous attempt by legislators to protect consumers. But we’ve adopted a more positive view since. The Act should make it easier to buy and sell insurance products without compromising consumers. And that’s what we should focus on. Are you ready for the CPA? Add your comment below, or send it to [email protected]

Comments

Added by Roy Lawrence, 25 Aug 2010
Yes, but.........has it been established that the CPA applies to services regulated by FAIS or the Long-Term and Short Term Acts? Has the FSB applied to have the insurance industry exempt from the provisions of the Act? If it is not exempt entirely, as I understand it, the exclusion of the Short-Term and Long-Term Insurance Acts is subject to those Acts being aligned with the consumer protection measures provided for in the CPA within a period of 18 months from the commencement of the Act, failing which, the provisions of the CPA will apply? Changing policy wordings will not only be a nightmare administratively, but they are tried and tested at Law. Precedent will fall by the wayside unless the re-drafters are very careful.
Report Abuse
Added by Joel Bergman, 25 Aug 2010
You head your article "PLAIN ENGLISH COULD SAVE INSURERS MILLIONS". I am not sure I understand how you arrive at this conclusion. If the CPA does indeed apply I dread the uncertainty that will immediately impact on EVERY wording out there today. I have a Lloyd's Jewellers's Block binder - the basic wording has been tried and tested over years. But it is not necessarily written in simple English. I have a database containing literally hundreds of additional template / specimen endorsements (virtually every policy is different, if only slightly and the required endorsements are added as may be required). The fundamental problem is WHO or HOW does one determine when a wording is actually drafted in simple English....
Report Abuse

Comment on this Post

Name*

Email Address*

Comment*

Plain English could save insurers millions
quick poll
Question

If you had to hazard a guess, when do you reckon the COFI Bill will be signed into law?

Answer