Axa and the Claims Underwriting Exchange

OnanTheBarbarian

Insurers are scumbags and are not to be trusted . Pretty much a cover all allowance there

ebaynumpty

I like your style.

rs65

ebaynumpty wrote: »

I would suggest if anyone has had to make an insurance claim, you all check the value the insurance company have listed against them and if it's inflated, get them to change it.

It used to be normal practice for a letter to be sent on closure of a claim giving confirmation of costs involved. I think that should be resurrected.

CUE store data provided to them - they appear to be an innocent bystander here. I think this thread should be titled AXA rather than CUE.

ebaynumpty

rs65 wrote: »

It used to be normal practice for a letter to be sent on closure of a claim giving confirmation of costs involved. I think that should be resurrected.

CUE store data provided to them - they appear to be an innocent bystander here. I think this thread should be titled AXA rather than CUE.

You would have thought, though Axa saw fit to "accidentally lose" an copy of this paperwork.

Changed the name of the title. Though I accidentally named the insurer/underwriter, not sure if I was supposed to do that.

InsideInsurance

rs65 wrote: »

It used to be normal practice for a letter to be sent on closure of a claim giving confirmation of costs involved. I think that should be resurrected.

The problem with these letters is that they generate a mass of phone calls. For Home insurance it is often the opposite of the OPs problem, that the person gets a replacement TV for their 6 year old screen that they broke and are happy with it until a letter drops through saying the insurer paid £400 for the TV -v- the £900 that the claimant had paid 6 years ago and how can this be a like for like replacement.

The opposite tends to be true for Motor where people tend to call to complain about the total cost of the TP claim because the insurer had to pay for a near like for like hire car or the fees the ambulance chasers added to the case where as if you dont write to the insured to tell them the vast majority never call in to ask what the total claim cost was in the end.

In neither case does the result of the claim actually tend to change at all but there are significant operational costs and ultimately most people want their insurance at the cheapest possible cost and if you can save a couple of hundred claims staff and the supporting infrastructure you need for them then you can charge less for your insurance.

Arguably it may be a good thing to raise public awareness on the cost of TP claims rather than leaving it to the Daily Hate and their sensationalist headlines but I doubt many would be wanting to pay the extra premium to get that.

rs65

InsideInsurance wrote: »

The problem with these letters is that they generate a mass of phone calls. For Home insurance it is often the opposite of the OPs problem, that the person gets a replacement TV for their 6 year old screen that they broke and are happy with it until a letter drops through saying the insurer paid £400 for the TV -v- the £900 that the claimant had paid 6 years ago and how can this be a like for like replacement.

Regardless, it is a valid question asked by any future insurers so the insured needs to know.

InsideInsurance

rs65 wrote: »

Regardless, it is a valid question asked by any future insurers so the insured needs to know.

Not by any but by some.

Insurers typically dont have issues answering the question, and fielding the subsequent questions as a company though the people on the phone may think otherwise, but the proportion of people that ask is tiny.

We stopped issuing the letters during my time in claims and it was almost as if a tap was turned off overnight in how much our call volumes went down, particularly for our team that dealt with the third party aspect of the claim.

This would lead most to assume that either (a) insurers are putting it on the renewal invites in the claims history section and people are actually reading the schedule enough to spot it or (b) most people ball park the cost when answering the question. Certainly my money goes on (b) and is indeed what I have done for both my claims in recent years.

Certainly every insurer that I've worked on pricing for paid little to no interest in the value of prior claims, this is also indicatively supported by running two quotes with two different claims costs and only 2 out of the top 10 insurers/ brokers changing their response but on the basis that both of those declined to quote on the 2nd attempt it could well be a counter fraud mechanism rather than an actual pricing decision.

If insurers were predominately concerned over the value of prior claims I think we would have already had the scandal in the press about it (or people are very very good at ball parking the costs of claims, especially motor claims where clearly the TP element is much more of a blind spot for the insured)

David_InsDef

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Certainly every insurer that I've worked on pricing for paid little to no interest in the value of prior claims, this is also indicatively supported by running two quotes with two different claims costs and only 2 out of the top 10 insurers/ brokers changing their response but on the basis that both of those declined to quote on the 2nd attempt it could well be a counter fraud mechanism rather than an actual pricing decision.

I've worked in Pricing (and Underwriting) for a few also. Whilst claim value is seldom used as a factor in determining the quoted premium, it is quite often used in determining underwriting acceptance - i.e. a single claim value above X or claims values in aggregate above X = decline.

Edited: the above relates to household insurance. I've not encountered it as a feature of motor insurance for some years.

If you ran your test quotes again putting a claim in at £100 and then changed it to £56k, individual insurers' premiums may not alter significantly but I'm confident the providers making up the Top 10 would.

InsideInsurance

David_InsDef wrote: »

If you ran your test quotes again putting a claim in at £100 and then changed it to £56k, individual insurers' premiums may not alter significantly but I'm confident the providers making up the Top 10 would.

I used the OP's values of £12k and £54k and just 2 providers dropped out

David_InsDef

InsideInsurance wrote: »

I used the OP's values of £12k and £54k and just 2 providers dropped out

But if you use £100 and £54k, how many come new providers come into play at the lower amount - thus claim value is a significant factor in overall acceptance.