Over the next 5 years, I believe tensions between the insurance industry and the general public around privacy issues will grow to be as controversial as the misselling of payment protection insurance is today. This is the first of a series of posts exploring privacy and insurance.
Does the UK insurance and financial services sectors face a ‘napster moment’ around how they engage with customers? In other words, a point at which someone from outside the industry comes in and reinvents how things are done.
The telematics debate continues to recognise privacy as an issue, but still stops short of addressing how it should be tackled, let alone resolved. This hesitancy will become a millstone around the necks of insurers unless they address consent.
The second of two posts about the ethical dimension to how insurance fraud should be tackled. Insurers need to look at these six themes as a step towards securing the long term support of consumer groups, and the public at large, for this important initiative.
Tackling insurance fraud is an ethical thing to do, but the way in which insurers go about tackling it also has an ethical dimension. In this and a subsequent post, I set out the key themes around which a set of principles could be fashioned to embed some ethical thinking into how insurers tackle fraud.
The launch of a new landmine charity is to be applauded, but its supporters from the insurance and broking community need to reflect on any association they may have with companies who manufacture ordnance of similar indiscriminatory effect, cluster bombs being the most obvious example.