Aviva and NCD - not Treating Customers Fairly

Quentin

raskazz wrote: »

It is prudent to validate NCD in some cases/profiles - i.e. confirm verbally with the insurer - as, believe it or not, there are false NCD letters submitted in the real world.

OK.

But in this case they have confirmed their letter is genuine!!

How much more prudence do you need???

dacouch

Out of interest Raskazz, the claims ratio for your Insurer with regard to no claims bonuses that they or the broker had not validated. One of your reps brought it up when advising us that they wanted 100% of no claims bonuses fully validated as you data showed the ratio was noticably bad compared to the rest of the book.

They did mention the percentage but I have forgotten

raskazz

dacouch wrote: »

Out of interest Raskazz, the claims ratio for your Insurer with regard to no claims bonuses that they or the broker had not validated. One of your reps brought it up when advising us that they wanted 100% of no claims bonuses fully validated as you data showed the ratio was noticably bad compared to the rest of the book.

They did mention the percentage but I have forgotten

I don't have any data to hand - most of the stuff that I deal with is non-standard so isn't NCD rated anyway.

As detail of whether NCD is or isn't validated by the broker isn't transmitted via EDI, I suspect that the conclusion been drawn from historic agreements that have been entered into with particular brokers - i.e. where it has been agreed that NCD need not be validated by certain brokers, those loss ratios have been worse than the equivalent business where NCD is validated. So all you can do is compare those historic agreement broker loss ratios with the rest of your distribution channels. Then of course it is hard to separate out the effect of NCD validation from other factors that vary by broker - i.e. competence of staff, whether marketing is aligned with the insurer's market etc.

Some insurers do not validate NCD at all - that to me is madness! At a previous insurer, I saw evidence that NCD validation, despite being labour-intensive, is a profitable operation as it (i) often flags undisclosed claims for which a load is applied and (ii) often flags a lower level of NCD applicable/and or NCD still being used on the other policy, again additional premiums result from this. For me the ideal solution with limited resource would be to validate a certain portion of NCD proofs received - i.e. by a matrix of something like age/area/MOSAIC so that the resources are targeted to the risks most susceptible to NCD misrepresentation.

adamc260

Each insurer has it's own maximum. It's your responsibility to keep previous renewals showing how many years you submit to Aviva and how you were with them for a year but they only issue NCD of ... <Insert years here>

Many companies do it, Aviva aren't alone!

If you have the letter showing 7 years just submit that to your new Insurer as they only ever like one form of proof... not many companies have enough staff to receive post AND to make follow up calls on it as well.

raskazz

adamc260 wrote: »

Each insurer has it's own maximum. It's your responsibility to keep previous renewals showing how many years you submit to Aviva and how you were with them for a year but they only issue NCD of ... <Insert years here>

Many companies do it, Aviva aren't alone!

If you have the letter showing 7 years just submit that to your new Insurer as they only ever like one form of proof... not many companies have enough staff to receive post AND to make follow up calls on it as well.

Again, please read the actual thread!

The discussion is not around the fact that insurers have a maximum number of years that they take into account for allowing no claims discounts.

The discussion is around the fact that Aviva issued a letter stating 7 years but would not confirm this amount over the phone - only 5 years - WHY?

rs65

raskazz wrote: »

For reference:

TCF outcome 6: Consumers do not face unreasonable post-sale barriers imposed by firms to change product, switch provider, submit a claim or make a complaint.

Is the above an unreasonable post-sale barrier to switching provider? You betcha!

I don't understand the problem. They have provided evidence of 7 years. What is the barrier?

adamc260

raskazz wrote: »

Again, please read the actual thread!

The discussion is not around the fact that insurers have a maximum number of years that they take into account for allowing no claims discounts.

The discussion is around the fact that Aviva issued a letter stating 7 years but would not confirm this amount over the phone - only 5 years - WHY?

Your not going to get your answer here unless someone from Aviva responds.

raskazz

adamc260 wrote: »

Your not going to get your answer here unless someone from Aviva responds.

Yes I appreciate that. But it is an issue open for wider discussion, if we can stay on topic.

raskazz

rs65 wrote: »

I don't understand the problem. They have provided evidence of 7 years. What is the barrier?

The barrier is that if the client's new insurer calls to validate the written NCD provided then Aviva seemingly are not confirming the total years earned - merely their own particular maximum.

Just do a search for "NCD" and "Aviva" and there are a few threads where this has caused policyholders issues.

No wonder brokers think Aviva are a weird and capricious insurer to deal with if they have to put up with this type of nonsense day in, day out.

adamc260

raskazz wrote: »

Yes I appreciate that. But it is an issue open for wider discussion, if we can stay on topic.

But it really isn't. You ended your last comment with 'WHY' to which my response was "Your not going to get your answer here unless someone from Aviva responds."

I do agree that it is strange how a letter can be issued with one thing but they cannot verbally confirm it but as I've already said you won't get an answer here.