Part 5 in my series about ethics and insurance claims. Ethical culture is at the heart of how staff engage with claimants and determines the conclusions about fairness and trust that claimants are left with.
For the insurance sector, being in a conflict of interest is like having the flu – there’s nothing unethical about it; it’s just something that happens to us all. So the ethical question to be addressed is not how you avoid conflicts of interest, but how you recognise and respond to them.
This is the first in a series of posts about the ethical issues associated with insurance claims. I’m going to start off with what is probably the most significant of all such ethical issues, information asymmetry.
Insurance claims are pivotal experiences in the relationship between the insurer and the policyholder. In a series of posts, I'll be exploring the key ethical issues associated with insurance claims, starting this week with information asymmetry.
How well have insurers been managing the balance between the privacy concerns that surveillance can give rise to and the need to effective counter fraud measures? And what's in it for the insurance sector for doing so?
Surveillance is one of the key privacy issues that insurers need to pay attention to. In this post, I’ll outline why surveillance can be so unsettling and later this week, set out why it’s an issue that insurers need to manage carefully.
Secondary use has been a problematic ethical issue for insurers, causing the motor market to be labelled as dysfunctional. It creates a tension for insurers that needs to be resolved in order for trust to be rebuilt.
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.
If a policyholder takes steps to reduce the risk, surely that's a good thing. This doesn't seem to be the case with flood insurance. Insurers want to rely on big structural defences. It's an approach inherent with dangers, not least that it might not work.
Today's launch of the Insurance Fraud Register represents a big step for the UK insurance sector, not least in how it has to now deliver a necessary service in a fair and transparent way. Several issues have clearly been resolved, but others remain to put support from the public at risk.
The practices described in the recent OFT report into motor insurance may well have led to all sorts of unintended consequences for insurers. A couple are outlined here, along with some thoughts relating to a central issue for consumers: fairness.
A more detailed analysis of the ethics of what the OFT found when investigating motor insurance claims. Are referral fees unethical? How did corporate cultures appear to leave ethics by the wayside? The FSA and MoJ have some questions to ask, of individuals, insurers and themselves.
What should insurers do to resolve the question of who will own the data created by their use of telematics in products like motor? One particular step might make a real difference, if handled properly.
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.
As three insurers plead guilt in an Irish court to having information obtained illegally by a private investigator, is it now time for the insurance sector to see a clearer and stronger tone from the top to drive out these practices once and for all?
The insurance sector needs to take great care in how it manages the use of private investigators on potentially fraudulent claims, otherwise it could find its ethics sliding down the same slippery slope as the media