Viewpoint: Can there be a claims coalition?

There seems to be an eternal conflict of interest between brokers and insurers, fighting for the ownership of the client, with one side trying to gain the upper hand however much either side will dismiss the charge.

Insurers sometimes question the value that brokers bring to the transaction in the face of perceived excessive commission costs, while brokers are ever more nervous of any perceived attempts to cut them out of the loop. Nowhere is this conflict more concentrated than when a claim arises: it is the broker that the client turns to for updates on progress and their chances of receiving payment. Then there is the matter of venting spleen over any perceived delays.

The client sees the intermediary as the point of contact, so in their eyes it is the responsibility of the broker to ensure that insurers are doing the best job in terms of delivering. This leads to a chain of pressure with policyholders pushing brokers, which in turn press underwriters for progress and updates to meet the demands of their clients.

Modern technology brings with it streamlining of the process, delivering real choice for the broker when it comes to how claims are handled. They can decide to take on more of the claims processing or hand over the claim's management to the underwriter, then make certain that the insurer has the best possible information to settle the claim. Technology also allows brokers to give their clients direct access to the status of the claim, improving client service still further.

Uneasy bedfellows as they are, can the Liberal-Conservative coalition set a precedent for brokers and insurers? Will we come together for the benefit of the client and ultimately the market? Certainly, the technology available to us now makes this more achievable than ever before.

Tim Crossley is sales manager at Fineos Corporation.

Source: PB – June 2010