Regulator finds ‘concerning' evidence of poor handling of insurance claims
FCA analysis indicated that increases in the cost of motor claims – due to higher prices for cars, parts, labour, energy and more complex cars and supply chains – have contributed to premium increases.
The cost of hire vehicles, the number and cost of theft claims and uninsured drivers have also risen significantly. This confirms that increased costs outside of firms' control, rather than firm profit, were the biggest cause of recent premium rises in motor insurance.
But the FCA did identify that referral fees from credit hire firms and claims management companies were associated with slower claims processing and increasing costs.
Where it has seen poor practice from firms, the regulator said it is addressing it directly with them, including taking action against specific firms where necessary.
The regulator said that 'concerning' evidence of poor claims handling practices included a lack of oversight of outsourced services, resulting in poor customer outcomes, delays in settling claims and high complaint volumes.
It also found evidence of insufficient management information, resulting in failures to promptly identify and resolve claims handling issues.
Cash settlements were also being used in some cases without sufficient consideration of whether they are most suitable, the regulator said.
The FCA also highlighted high rejection rates for storm damage claims, saying only 32% of such claims made to a sample of firms in 2024 resulted in a payment.
The regulator is also providing evidence for coordinated action from Government, industry, and other regulators, as part of the Government's motor taskforce, to help drive down the cost of motor premiums. This could help limit cost increases but it cannot prevent them, the FCA said.
It has also published an interim update of an ongoing premium finance market study investigating whether consumers receive fair value when choosing to pay for insurance in monthly instalments.
While premium finance allows customers to spread costs, making them affordable and providing flexibility, the regulator has found some firms earn much more money than it costs to provide the service. It will explore these concerns further in the next phase of the study.
The FCA said it will seek to tackle any issues it finds first through the Consumer Duty, publishing a final report by the end of 2025.
Sarah Pritchard, deputy chief executive of the FCA, said: 'Insurance provides peace of mind but people must be confident they can get a fair deal and be treated right when the worst happens.
'External cost pressures are primarily to blame for recent motor premium increases, not increased firm profits, but there is some more work to do on claims handling, particularly in home and travel. That's why we're stepping up – making sure claims are handled promptly and fairly and pushing for a coordinated effort to tackle the root causes of rising motor premiums.
'A well-functioning insurance market helps consumers navigate their financial lives and supports growth by building people's resilience to financial and personal shocks.'
The FCA also said that evaluation of previous pricing reforms showed they are having the intended impact on the price gap between new and existing customers in both the motor and home markets.
This means its reforms were effective in curbing 'price walking' where loyal customers were charged more at renewal, the regulator said.
Association of British Insurers (ABI) director general Hannah Gurga said: 'The FCA's findings confirm that record-breaking claims costs are behind recent increases in motor insurance premiums.
'They also demonstrate that many of these cost pressures – such as rising vehicle repair costs, part shortages and increased thefts – stem from issues beyond the industry's direct control, making collaboration essential to find sustainable, long-term solutions.
'Ensuring a smooth and stress-free claims process is crucial for customers when going through what can already be incredibly difficult circumstances. Our members work hard to achieve this, but we will engage with them and the regulator to understand what improvements can be made in the claims handling journey, to ensure good outcomes for customers and to support trust and confidence in the industry.'
James Daley, managing director at Fairer Finance, said: 'As things stand, consumers continue to struggle to understand the differences between insurance products.'
He added: 'But even if consumers manage to buy a product that meets their needs, they still have no reliable way of knowing whether the insurer will treat them fairly at claims stage. And the FCA's research shows that there is a wide difference in standards at this crucial moment.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
27 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain's pension crisis is about to get even worse
The Government's review of pensions is asking some of the right questions. Top of the list is the age at which they should start to be paid. It is not a given that the state should fund the last third of someone's life, regardless of need. That is a choice, and a recent one. When the Old Age Pension began in 1909, it was paid from 70 and you had to have lived in the UK for 20 years and to be of 'good character'. It was means-tested, too – you needed to earn less than £21 a year to qualify. So, Liz Kendall, the Work and Pensions Secretary, is right to look first at the state pension age. And right to commission a report on the proportion of adult life spent in retirement. When the modern state pension was introduced in 1948, a 65-year-old could expect to receive it for just 13 years, about a sixth of their life expectancy. She is right, too, to investigate ways to boost pension savings – 8pc of earnings is not enough – and to broaden the number of people putting money aside for their retirement. Only half of working-age people are doing that, a fifth of the self-employed and fewer still of some ethnic minorities. That's not good. As ever, when it comes to pensions policy, there is also a have-cake-and-eat-it problem. The Government spends about 5pc of GDP on pensions – more than £120bn last year – but it persists with the fantasy that the amount paid to pensioners can rise into the future by the highest of earnings, inflation or 2.5pc. The triple lock is unaffordable. The unavoidable truth about pensions is that small changes in a range of unpredictable variables make a big difference when they are compounded over the decades that we now expect to live after we have stopped working. This is true for the good changes that government policy and personal choice can deliver. And for the bad ones that we can't do much about. That's why the Government is asking only some of the right questions. There are others it needs to address, all of which are difficult. The biggest pensions challenge may well be one that no one is talking about. This all became abundantly clear to me recently when I helped a colleague out with a deceptively simple question. He wanted to know what rate of investment return he needed to aim for in order to achieve the comfortable retirement he was hoping to enjoy. To answer that, I employed my pathetically rudimentary Excel skills to build a spreadsheet with a few variables that we could play with until we arrived at a plausible plan. I plugged in how much he had saved; how much he intended to put aside in future, and for how long; when he planned to wind down into semi-retirement and when he would stop completely; when he would take the state pension; and the return he would aim to achieve on his investments both before and after he stopped working. I ran the numbers from his current age of 52 until, with luck, he turns 90. Crucially, I had to make some quite big assumptions, the most important of which were that the triple lock would continue throughout his life and that the Bank of England would succeed in hitting its 2pc inflation target. By tweaking all these variables and assumptions, we were able to monitor their impact on the cumulative size of his pension pot. As you might expect, saving more for longer in an only moderately inflationary environment ended well. Working for a bit longer made a big difference. Accepting a lower income in retirement helped. None of this is rocket science, and probably doesn't require a Pensions Commission to confirm. That said, I was surprised by some of the things we discovered. One was the remarkable power of starting early. The principal reason that my colleague was pleasantly surprised by his required rate of investment return was that he had spent the previous 30 years studiously paying into his company pension, supported by a generous employer. The first additional question the Government needs to find an answer to is how to get young people engaged with their pensions. It may be boring, but it is not as boring as being old and poor. The second thing the spreadsheet taught us was the power of delay. Working just a few more years, even in a part-time capacity, can transform the arithmetic of our pension savings. Paying in for longer and taking out for less time, together with a few extra years of compound investment growth, is a magical combination. Find what you enjoy and keep doing it. But the biggest eye-opener for me was the devastating impact of even a modest uptick in inflation. A quick and easy way to make your money run out is to stop work and then try to maintain your standard of living by increasing the amount you draw down from your pension in line with rising prices. For my colleague, nudging up the assumed inflation rate from 2pc to 3pc was the difference between a £700,000 pension pot at the age of 90 and running out of cash completely a couple of years earlier. The pensions crisis that no one is talking about, therefore, is on the face of it nothing to do with pensions at all. Yes, more people need to save more, to start earlier and to carry on for longer. The Government has a role to play in encouraging all of those. But it, and the Bank of England, has an even bigger task. To keep inflation at a level where it doesn't blow our plans out of the water.
North Wales Chronicle
an hour ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Keir Starmer and Narendra Modi set to sign Britain-India trade deal
The Prime Minister and his Indian counterpart also agreed ahead of their meeting on Thursday to ramp up joint efforts to tackle illegal migration and organised crime. The UK-India trade deal is understood to be the largest of its kind for its economic impact on Britain. It will see tariffs on an array of British goods reduced from an average of 15% to 3%, with the aim of boosting the £11 billion of imports into the south Asian nation. Whisky tariffs will be slashed in half, according to the Government, and will fall further over successive years, while other industries including soft drinks, cars and cosmetics are also expected to see cheaper duties. Before his meeting with Mr Modi to confirm the deal, Sir Keir said: 'Our landmark trade deal with India is a major win for Britain. It will create thousands of British jobs across the UK, unlock new opportunities for businesses and drive growth in every corner of the country, delivering on our Plan for Change. 'We're putting more money in the pockets of hardworking Brits and helping families with the cost of living, and we're determined to go further and faster to grow the economy and raise living standards across the UK.' The deal is expected to result in 2,200 jobs across the country and £6 billion investment by British and Indian businesses. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the investment will 'reach all regions and nations of the UK so working people in every community can feel the benefits'. He added: 'The almost £6 billion in new investment and export wins announced today will deliver thousands of jobs and shows the strength of our partnership with India as we ensure the UK is the best place in the world to invest and do business.' The UK and India are also bolstering co-operation on tackling corruption, fraud, organised crime and illegal migration, by sharing criminal records and other intelligence. The deal has not given the UK as much access as it would have liked to India's financial and legal services industries. The agreement promises some benefits for the UK's financial services, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves understood to have pushed on behalf of the sector in discussions with her Indian counterpart. But more wide-ranging access was not agreed, and talks continue on a bilateral investment treaty aimed at protecting British investments in India and vice versa. The two nations also continue to discuss UK plans for a tax on high-carbon industries, which India believes could hit its imports unfairly. Negotiations on the deal began when Boris Johnson was prime minister in 2022, and were concluded in May this year. Labour sought to portray closing the deal, as well as trade agreements with the US and the EU, as evidence of the Government's pragmatism and global outlook. But shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith said it had only been made possible 'because of Brexit delivered by the Conservatives'. He added: 'Any trade deal that can successfully cut regulation which stops Britain's makers from creating new jobs and wealth will be a step in the right direction. 'But the irony should not be lost on anyone that any gains from this trade deal will be blown out of the water by (Deputy Prime Minister) Angela Rayner's union charter, stifling business with red tape, the jobs tax and, come autumn, Rachel Reeves' inevitable tax hikes that will punish Britain's makers just to reward those who do not contribute.' The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) has said that the signing 'sends a powerful signal that the UK is open for business and remains resolute in its commitment to free and fair trade'. Chief executive Rain Newton-Smith added: 'A trade agreement with India – one of the world's fastest-growing economies – is a springboard for long-term partnership and prosperity. UK firms can take advantage of this new platform to scale, diversify and compete on the global stage.' Elsewhere, Sir Keir is facing calls to raise the case of Jagtar Singh Johal, a British citizen who has been detained in India since 2017, when the Prime Minister meets Mr Modi. The Scottish Sikh is accused of being a member of the Khalistan Liberation Force, which is banned as a terror group in India. His family say he is being arbitrarily detained, with his brother Gurpreet Singh Johal insisting the matter should be 'high on the agenda when the prime ministers meet'.
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Keir Starmer and Narendra Modi set to sign Britain-India trade deal
The Prime Minister and his Indian counterpart also agreed ahead of their meeting on Thursday to ramp up joint efforts to tackle illegal migration and organised crime. The UK-India trade deal is understood to be the largest of its kind for its economic impact on Britain. It will see tariffs on an array of British goods reduced from an average of 15% to 3%, with the aim of boosting the £11 billion of imports into the south Asian nation. Whisky tariffs will be slashed in half, according to the Government, and will fall further over successive years, while other industries including soft drinks, cars and cosmetics are also expected to see cheaper duties. Before his meeting with Mr Modi to confirm the deal, Sir Keir said: 'Our landmark trade deal with India is a major win for Britain. It will create thousands of British jobs across the UK, unlock new opportunities for businesses and drive growth in every corner of the country, delivering on our Plan for Change. 'We're putting more money in the pockets of hardworking Brits and helping families with the cost of living, and we're determined to go further and faster to grow the economy and raise living standards across the UK.' The deal is expected to result in 2,200 jobs across the country and £6 billion investment by British and Indian businesses. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the investment will 'reach all regions and nations of the UK so working people in every community can feel the benefits'. He added: 'The almost £6 billion in new investment and export wins announced today will deliver thousands of jobs and shows the strength of our partnership with India as we ensure the UK is the best place in the world to invest and do business.' The UK and India are also bolstering co-operation on tackling corruption, fraud, organised crime and illegal migration, by sharing criminal records and other intelligence. The deal has not given the UK as much access as it would have liked to India's financial and legal services industries. The agreement promises some benefits for the UK's financial services, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves understood to have pushed on behalf of the sector in discussions with her Indian counterpart. But more wide-ranging access was not agreed, and talks continue on a bilateral investment treaty aimed at protecting British investments in India and vice versa. The two nations also continue to discuss UK plans for a tax on high-carbon industries, which India believes could hit its imports unfairly. Negotiations on the deal began when Boris Johnson was prime minister in 2022, and were concluded in May this year. Labour sought to portray closing the deal, as well as trade agreements with the US and the EU, as evidence of the Government's pragmatism and global outlook. But shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith said it had only been made possible 'because of Brexit delivered by the Conservatives'. He added: 'Any trade deal that can successfully cut regulation which stops Britain's makers from creating new jobs and wealth will be a step in the right direction. 'But the irony should not be lost on anyone that any gains from this trade deal will be blown out of the water by (Deputy Prime Minister) Angela Rayner's union charter, stifling business with red tape, the jobs tax and, come autumn, Rachel Reeves' inevitable tax hikes that will punish Britain's makers just to reward those who do not contribute.' The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) has said that the signing 'sends a powerful signal that the UK is open for business and remains resolute in its commitment to free and fair trade'. Chief executive Rain Newton-Smith added: 'A trade agreement with India – one of the world's fastest-growing economies – is a springboard for long-term partnership and prosperity. UK firms can take advantage of this new platform to scale, diversify and compete on the global stage.' Elsewhere, Sir Keir is facing calls to raise the case of Jagtar Singh Johal, a British citizen who has been detained in India since 2017, when the Prime Minister meets Mr Modi. The Scottish Sikh is accused of being a member of the Khalistan Liberation Force, which is banned as a terror group in India. His family say he is being arbitrarily detained, with his brother Gurpreet Singh Johal insisting the matter should be 'high on the agenda when the prime ministers meet'.
