Drivers 'are baffled by no-claims discounts': Millions are paying for protection in mistaken belief it will stop premiums
#insurers shafting people as usual, and the FOS condone it...lets side with insurers,because it is common practice, well that makes it ok then...
Car insurance companies ‘making £1 billion a year by keeping customers in the dark’Britain’s largest car insurers are making more than £1 billion a year by not properly informing customers when they renew their policies, it has been reported
Car insurance for young drivers reverses 10.3% in the last year but that spells bad news for older motorists...
EY survey shows consumers place more trust in banks and drug companies with just 7% having complete trust in their provider.
An EY survey has revealed that just 7% of consumers have "complete trust" in their insurer.
UK insurance customers were found to hold more trust in the banking sector, despite the severe reputational damage it has suffered over the last seven years, than in their insurance provider. The level of trust was also found to be lower than in any other European country, and over 50% below the global average, according to the latest EY Global Consumer Insurance Survey.
EY surveyed 23,595 insurance customers across 30 countries, including 800 from the UK. The interviews took place in April to July of this year.
Graham Handy, global customer insurance leader at EY, commented: "At a time of great upheaval across the entire UK insurance industry, with the motor market reporting unprofitability, the home insurance market not far behind and dramatic changes to pensions, this news could not come at a worse time."
The survey also showed that over a quarter (26%) of UK customers surveyed claimed that they were likely to switch insurance provider in the next 12 months. Cost was cited as the main reason behind this, with policy benefits and coverage at a distant second and reputation and benefits barely making an impact.
The UK insurance consumer is also far more driven by price than many of their international counterparts - 83% of those likely to switch stated cost as the primary reason, according to the survey's findings. This was much higher than the global average (67%) and other comparable markets such as the US (64%), France (60%) and Germany (72%).
UK customers also want to receive more communication from their insurer; not just general information or policy updates, but also promotions. Over half (54%) of customers said they were never contacted about promotions, and 23% would like to receive them annually.
The results also showed that the majority of UK insurance customers still preferred to manage their policy enquiries via the telephone, but more than 30% claimed to be open to using emerging channels, including webchats and smartphone apps.
Handy continued: "It's clear that insurers have yet to get ‘direct-to-consumer' right. Even where there is a broker or an agent managing the relationship, it doesn't mean the customer is getting the information they want.
"The way consumers want to be communicated with is changing - they want more frequent, meaningful and personalised messages, and are willing to embrace new ways of receiving it - and the insurance provider ought to ensure they are delivering this.
He concluded: "With the rise of digital, it is increasingly easy, and the race is now on to see who can do it most effectively, and the fastest.
Variability and the Pareto RuleWithout stopping for supplements, leveling work throughout the repair process becomes much easier
It’s often said about projects that 80 percent of the work happens in the last 20 percent of the timeline (the Pareto Rule). If you have ever been involved with a construction project,
you can relate.
Complex repairs (34 percent of the average collision shop’s work) often end up mirroring this Pareto Rule. It’s usually not true that literally 80 percent of the necessary work happens very close to the end, but it feels like that, because as deadlines approach, and work is accelerated, the more rapid abnormalities rear their ugly heads, one after another. Technicians and the expeditor/manager do everything they can to conquer each as quickly as possible, whether it be missing parts, re-work, unforeseen resets, etc. However, it only takes one unresolved abnormality to compromise quality or miss the target delivery date.
There are two tools available to greatly reduce the end-of-job rush, and the resulting effects (poor quality, stressed staff, uncertainty about completion date/time). The first tool is smoothing or leveling. Intuitively, we already recognize the value of smooth and predictable, so it’s often verbalized as "scheduling.” The other tool is variability reduction. While both are highly effective, they have little or no chance when prescribed on top of a loosely connected system of independent producers. If technicians are largely responsible for the bulk of the repair (dismantle, create supplement, fix, reassemble), and "handling" the issues that arise with each of their repairs, it is unlikely we will have much control over changing "how" they do that (especially if their pay is tied to how well they keep all those balls in the air).
In a connected process, where the value delivery system is comprised of clearly defined [standards driven] steps that serve to build upon each other as work progresses, where tasks are arranged such that each one is done as early in the process as possible so it can be done completely and correctly, and the manpower is specialized to perform just the tasks within the step they are assigned, it is quite simple to create a repeatable, dependable, variability reduction step.
In our company, we call it "Pre-repair Planning" (RP). It includes pre-ordering of specific parts (not all), it includes taking the car apart completely, such that no one downstream should be the first to remove anything (nut bolt, fastener, molding, emblem, sticker, cradle, knuckle, anything). This prevents the worst form of discovery downstream—finding something broken when you take it further apart, or breaking something when you further take it apart. It includes dimensionally correcting all structural control points (even if the structure will later be replaced), eliminating any repair vs. replace variability.
It includes all scuffing for paint (yes, 3-plus days prior to painting the car, we get the scuffing/cleaning step done so the car is dry when we go to mask, and body repairs start with a "clean" repair area). The scuffing of the blend and repair panels can be done 100 percent correctly at the initial dismantle step, so it meets the aforementioned requirement for task placement. RP includes sourcing sectioning procedures (so we know exactly how to section later and what to charge—no variability), scanning codes up front, roughing out any repair panels or bumper covers that are in excess of four hours (to remove the "variability" that it might not fix or might take longer than guesstimated).
It includes opening all new parts packaging to inspect and ensure there is no variability discovered by the tech between the part we needed and the part we received. It takes more time up front, but remarkably less near the end, and little or no variability remains to rear its ugly head as we approach delivery time. It’s the same amount of work (maybe less because a lot of rework and revisiting steps is eliminated), much of it just being done at a different stage.
Creating this variability reduction step (purposed with making the remaining work easier and free of surprises) along with other standardized steps for repair, prime, prep, refinish, reassembly and cleanup, affords the ability to smooth each of these steps out evenly, so cars can move at a continuous pace from start to finish without stops.
Without stopping for supplements, it’s not difficult, mathematically, to level work (even as variable as collision repair) so it can flow smoothly at a pace built upon averages. Then instead of feeling like 80 percent of the work has to get done in the last 20 percent of the repair cycle, it looks more like 80 percent of the work (and its potential variability) was completed in the first 20 percent of the repair’s life cycle.
Aaron Marshall manages Marshall Auto Body in Waukesha, Wis. He can be reached at email@example.com.
Insurers pushing for the government to introduce measures to reduce death and injury amongst young drivers have received backing from the parents of 16-24 year olds according to research carried out by Allianz.
This data supports the argument that change is needed, as statistics show that car crashes are the biggest cause of accidental death among young people.
The survey of 1,000 parents with children aged between16-24 revealed that 69% of parents think specific action should be taken to make young drivers safer.
Of the measures proposed by various road safety experts to help reduce the young driver accident rate, the parents in the survey favoured some ideas more than others. For example
Reflecting on the results, Allianz’s spokesman, Mark Bishop said:
“Over 80% of the parents said they were anxious about the safety of young drivers. Add this to the clear opinions parents have about the measures to improve their safety, and we have another compelling reason why the industry must continue to push the government to take action on this issue.”
Allianz Insurance is one of the largest general insurers in the UK and part of the Allianz SE Group, the largest property and casualty insurer worldwide.
Do you think #financial institutions have your interest at heart?InsurerLloyds Bank hit by record £117m PPI fine
Here to help ensure consumers are treated fairly by insurance companies.