orangeblock

Brokers ponder Regent’s loss-making book

06 June 2013 | Non-life | General | Fiona Zerbst

Regent Insurance Company recently indicated that it had decided to cancel its personal and commercial lines policies, written and serviced through its broker division, as these were loss-making book and offloading it would make good business sense. The bo

The Regent Group, which is part of Imperial, was at pains to point out it is not making an exit from the broker market – it believes, however, that its decision will allow the company to consolidate its business and focus on future growth. It has every intention of continuing to underwrite its motor and property classes.

FAnews readers may recall some restructuring back in 2008, when Regent Life and Regent Insurance merged. The Regent Group’s strategic move brought short-term and life business under one roof, saving approximately R35m a year – or at least that was the aim. Regent Insurance has been in business for almost 25 years and has strong ties in the motor industry as it primarily underwrites motor insurance.

BSG wants to ‘pick up the pieces’

There is now a scramble for the offloaded policies. According to reports, Broker Support Group (BSG) has declared it has a desire to ‘pick up the pieces’ – it has offered to take over the personal and commercial lines policies at the same premium, provided brokers provide it with the current policy schedule and claims history – but it is not the only player interested in doing so.

“The insurer market has been approaching brokers to take over the business thrown out by Regent; but you can be sure they will have a selective look at what business they take on versus business they apply punitive terms to,” said Peter Atkinson, national technical portfolio manager at the Financial Intermediaries Association (FIA). “Brokers should not simply take up the BSG offer, but must rather consider a range of alternatives before deciding on the best fit for their clients’ needs.”

Insurer weighs in

Auto & General has sent a letter to its brokers stating that in its 28-year history it has not cancelled a book of business, nor stopped doing business in a particular asset class. It has confirmed its commitment to its broker partners. “We pride ourselves on our ability and expertise when it comes to underwriting and risk rating,” wrote Sean Jackson, head of Auto & General Brokers.

The letter goes on to say that Auto & General successfully underwrites motor-only policies and launched the first commercial lines motor-only policy allowing for all risk cover, without supporting non-motor cover.

The market shake-out will doubtless see other insurers stepping in to reassure brokers and clients alike.

Are customers being treated fairly?

Would Regent’s move likely be considered fair in terms of Treating Customers Fairly (TCF)? According to Atkinson, it would.

“There is nothing in TCF that would stop an insurer from closing what turns out to be a loss-making book,” he said. “It may well be argued that the 30-days’ notice period is a little bit short to allow brokers to do the necessary to ensure alternative cover for their clients. But most likely this is the notice period in terms of the policy contract. There’s nothing like a bit of pressure to keep brokers on their toes.” Cancellations will take effect from 30 June 2013.

Atkinson said the FIA understands that the developments at Regent are part and parcel of a healthy insurance market.

We expect that our member brokers will react in the proper way to ensure that their clients’ best interests are served,” he said. “Brokers should check their clients’ needs to see if they have not changed, and find appropriate cover on the best possible terms with another insurer.”

Editor’s thoughts:
Brokers obviously have an obligation to the clients they have placed on cover with Regent. According to Atkinson, this is an example of why broker-assisted insurance clients are better off than their ‘direct’ peers. “In this case, the broker is responsible for finding a new insurer to cover his or her client’s risk – if the client was dealing directly with an insurer they would have to replace the cover without any assistance,” he said. What do you think is in the client’s best interest at this point? Comment below or email [email protected].

Comments

Added by Andre Stols, 07 Jun 2013
Add to that the fact that brokers(specially the younger ones)only write new business with their commission in mind- they do not think about the correct rate for a risk, nor the long term sustainability of a book. Insurers also have a hand in the problem in that they just vie for a slice of the very small cake in RSA, playing right into the hands of these ruthless brokers. It is time that Insurers get together and stop this practise for if they don't, the next Insurer and the next and the next and the next will pay the price via heavy losses, resulting in them also withdrawing and where will these non thinking brokers go to then????????
Report Abuse
Added by Andre Stols, 07 Jun 2013
I would like to add to my earlier comment. 1) The fact that and insurance underwriter offers to take over the book as is, tells me they are also in for a hiding and should rather be selective and underwrite properly at proper terms. 2) Claims pots are getting thinner by the day, yet the very same brokers helping the claims pot to get thinner are most probably adding policy fees on top of their commission, making their pot thicker- responsible effort should rather go into fattening up the claims pot. Furthermore, the FSB should look into the policy fees on top of commission again. I have been in this business 35 years already and we DO NOT charge policy fees, concentrating on our long term relationship via application of healthy underwriting principles.
Report Abuse
Added by Alasdair, 07 Jun 2013
I think that the way Imperial have handled this issue is very poor and wonder why any broker should consider supporting Regent going forward when their management have such a cowboy attitude to insurance. I think the industry should spare a thought for the 91 people (and their families) who were retrenched after the 'Im all right Jack' executive of the company firstly issue an instruction to their broker division to focus on growth at all costs and then, instead of making any effort to 'clean the book knee jerk a speedy cancellation. If I was part of the 91 I would put together a class action under the Companies Act against Imperial for shocking management decisions which have had a nasty impact on their livelihood!! I wonder if somebody at Regent remembered to take out D & O cover?!!
Report Abuse
Added by Samantha Burns, 07 Jun 2013
Is Regent treating customers fairly by cancelling their policy holders' cover because they are part of a "loss-making book"? To answer this question, I would consider a few of the TCF Outcomes: Outcome 3 and 5: I assume Regent made it quite clear in their policy documents that they reserve the right to cancel any policy at any time for any reason and would give 30 days' notice to the policy holder should Regent wish to do so. So, assuming that customers actually received 30 days' notice, Regent complied with both Outcome 3 (clear and timeous communication) and Outcome 5 in that they are doing what they said they could do. I agree with Peter Atkinson, however, that 30 days feels a bit too short a time. I know I would be scrambling if my insurer did that to me. Even though I signed a policy that probably also has the same reference to 30 days in it (I don't know), at the time of signing, one doesn't think through the implications of an insurer cancelling on you. One generally thinks of cancellations only with the shoe on the other foot. The question I would ask: Why is the book loss-making in the first place? Is this due to any incompetence in product design or actuarial calculations; or is it due to any mis-selling or poor targeting? Or is it due to poor claims management resulting in higher than expected reimbursements? Or is it due to abuse or fraud that was not properly managed? I hope none of the above. If any of the above, one or more of the TCF outcomes has been breached in my opinion.
Report Abuse
Added by Graham, 06 Jun 2013
I wonder just how much of this is due to the high costs of servicing the book? I remember when the average costs of servicing amounted to no more than around 25% of premium. Thanks to the FSB the costs are more in the region of 35% which is ridiculous to say the least. Having said that, there are plenty of companies out there who would give their eye-teeth for the book.
Report Abuse

Comment on this Post

Name*

Email Address*

Comment*

Brokers ponder Regent’s loss-making book
quick poll
Question

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

Answer