Insurance advisers generally have more satisfaction with insurance specific organisations than banks as they are more efficient, according to Adviser Ratings.
Pointing to its “2016 Adviser Sentiment Life Insurance Report”, Adviser Ratings managing director, Angus Woods, said insurance advisers found administration to be more efficient from insurance organisations than the big banks.
“Staff in specific insurers, like AIA, tend to be more well trained and more knowledgeable on the product than say the banks who have got a plethora of products across retail banking, insurance, and those sorts of things,” Woods said.
“Advisers found generally speaking, I wouldn’t say this is a blanket comment, but generally that it’s easier to deal with specific insurers as opposed to banking organisations.”
He said advisers felt the specific insurer administration staff and claim staff were better informed on the product front.
“That’s not to say the claims rates are higher or lower, but claims [from specific insurers] tend to be pushed out quicker and they don’t have to go through as many rungs of the ladder to get approval than they would at say an organisation where insurance isn’t their one skill set,” Woods said.
Woods said advisers wanted more training on staff product, and more technology development.
“Those insurers that are investing in those two elements are particularly well placed over the confidence of the adviser and the consumer,” he said.
“Generally there is less satisfaction with the Big Four banks but there are outliers like BT that have fared really well.”
Woods noted that advisers wanted more technology to be implemented to make the underwriting process and the claims handling process easier.
