Direct Insurance, is it the right move?

We as consumers are being bombarded with advertising, mock TV shows s and call centre telling us that it is better to insure directly and cut out the “expensive” middle man. A large emphasis is placed on the fact that they are irrelevant in the short term insurance realm and even more that they are a pure burden to the consumer. A recent advert comparing a broker to a fish and chip sales person is a clear indication that little regard is being placed on the role of financial advisors and brokers within the short term insurance industry.

The prudent question I believe we need to ask ourselves is whether we believe this propaganda and whether we would want to trust a call centre operator with insuring our valued assets and now even our lives. Let’s take the following points into consideration when unpack direct insurance for ourselves, ignoring propaganda.

It does not take a rocket scientist to understand that the very call centre operator assisting you in obtaining your insurance is in fact a low level employee, irrelevant of earnings, within the company. They are selling high volumes of policies and therefore making it impossible to remember a little thing like your name. If you have a dispute on your claim who would you speak to? The answer is very simple, their legal department. One young man, who alleges on Hellopeter.com that he was effectively bullied by a large direct insurer’s in house legal team into signing documents that eventually led to his claim being denied is proof of that.

Now no one is claiming that the young man is talking the truth about the matter or that the insurance company is in fact bullying clients into not paying claims, the fact that is being brought across is merely that when a dispute arose his communication point was moved from the friendly voice at the call centre to the legal department, an intimidating place for any non legal professional.
Now bringing that into comparison with a broker environment one needs to understand that your broker would be your port of call, not his legal department. If it is warranted that a legal department of an insurer has to get involved you would at least be “protected” if not just escorted by your broker. Your broker is also an individual with a larger vested interest in your well being and naturally concerned with you cancelling other policies with him. He or she is not just a voice.

I would like to re-iterate that this article is not aimed as an attack on direct insurance, although I must convey my surprise that the broker industry has not attacked back with similar vigour. It is merely aimed at providing some perspective within the propaganda.