Insurance ratings trap
Advisers who predominantly use ratings as the basis for recommending insurance products run the risk of encouraging their clients to purchase inappropriate cover due to the inconsistent and simplistic methodology employed by the industry raters.
In most cases, insurance product raters currently only take into account the generosity of a particular product, that is the number of features it offers to consumers, without considering if all the features are necessary, if the product represents value for money, if the features are sustainable, and if the insurance company actually has the ability to pay the claim should the need arise.
Genesys risk adviser Col Fullagar believes people have already taken out inappropriate policies in the market as a result of the present ratings regime.
“I have no doubt this is the case. When you say ‘the best’, that’s immediately interpreted as the most generous, but you may be very comfortable with certain restrictions on your contract. If you have a product that’s overly generous and you’re paying too high a price, you may have received quite poor advice,” he said.
He added that advisers might not be aware of the flaw in the ratings process because he did not know “if the current ratings systems lend themselves to any one being overly aware of the methodology behind them”.
However, Fullagar was confident most financial planners recommending these products were not using the ratings process as the sole basis for the advice.
“I’m sure the vast majority go through quite a robust fact finding process. I guess the problem is everyone’s been led to believe that the more generous it is, the more ancillary benefits and so on, the better it is for the client,” he said.
And concern over the situation surrounding reliance on ratings in general has not gone unnoticed by the Financial Planning Association (FPA).
The professional body said it had actually considered the subject of reliance on ratings in general when devising Principle Two in its Principles to Manage Conflicts of Interest, which deals with product suitability.
“When formulating Principle Two, there was a view among members of the Professional Standards and Ethics Committee that it might be useful to have some guidance on how approved product lists were put together, and how much emphasis is put on ratings when you are constructing such a list. It’s something we’re looking at, but it is yet to be decided if we will go to members with guidance on the subject,” an FPA spokesperson said.
Recommended for you
The new financial year has got off to a strong start in adviser gains, helped by new entrants, after heavy losses sustained in June.
Michael McCorry, chief investment officer at BlackRock Australia, has detailed how investors are reconsidering their 60/40 portfolios as macro uncertainty highlight the benefits of liquid alternatives.
Having reset its market focus to high-net-worth advisers, Praemium’s administration solution has been selected by Bell Potter in a deal that increases the platform's funds under administration by $6 billion.
High transition rates from financial advisers have helped Netwealth’s funds under administration rise by $3.7 billion in the fourth quarter of FY25.
