Secondary

TCF

Lack of TCF seen as Aggravating Factor

The latest settlement agreement, between the Registrar and New National Assurance Company Limited, contains an interesting new slant to what we have become used to.

The Registrar was of the opinion that the respondent contravened Rule 7.4(a) of the Short-term Policyholder Protection Rules in that the respondent “…failed to accept within a reasonable period, a claim submitted by its policyholder…”

While the normal mitigating circumstances are noted, the ones indicated as aggravating are quite interesting.

  • The conduct of the Respondent failed to demonstrate sound insurance principles and practice in the interests of the policyholder.
  • The lengthy period taken to settle the claim resulted in the policyholder not being treated fairly.

A fine of R100 000 was agreed between the two parties.

What makes these findings even more interesting is the emphasis that will be placed on claims management in the near future.

A “Complaints Management Discussion Document”, published in 2014, states in the preamble:

TCF Outcome 6 provides that “Customers do not face unreasonable post-sale barriers imposed by firms to change product, switch providers, submit a claim or make a complaint”.

The readiness of FSPs to use their complaints register as a means to ensure and demonstrate fair customer outcomes was already the subject of a thematic review by the FSB. We published two articles on the subject which you are welcome to revisit:

Complaints Management Part 1

Complaints Management Part 2.

Comments are closed.