PPI covers repayments on credit products if the borrower cannot
afford to maintain payments because of an accident, sickness,
unemployment or death. In 2006, over 90% of PPI products sold in
the UK were sold in connection with personal loans, credit cards,
mortgages and second mortgages.
The report sets out the Commission's provisional findings
following a 15-month investigation into PPI in the UK and concludes
that lack of competition is having an adverse affect on
consumers.
"Companies face little or no competition when selling payment
protection insurance to their credit customers," said the
Commission last week, "and as a result customers appear to be
overcharged by over £1.4 billion a year".
The Commission estimates there are over 14 million PPI policies
in the UK. But, according to consumer organisation Which?, as many
as two million loan customers may have been sold PPI policies under
which they will not be eligible to make a claim.
The problems identified by the report lie with the retail
distribution of PPI to consumers, rather than in the wholesale
provision of PPI products by underwriters to
distributors.
One of the main features of the retail market is that the
majority of PPI policies are bought at the same time as the related
credit product. In the Commission's view, this gives the customer
little chance to shop around.
"Most consumers understandably focus on the loan or credit and
its APR and tend to make a snap decision when the PPI product is
then offered to them," said Peter Davis, the Inquiry Chairman. "In
fact, many customers simply aren't aware that they can get PPI
elsewhere, potentially for less and equally others believe that
buying PPI from the provider increases their chance of getting a
loan".
The Commission also concluded that complicated policies and
pricing structures hinder customers from being able to compare
different PPI products effectively. It found that "switching"
(changing to an alternative provider) can be expensive and, in the
case of credit card PPI, lack of access to information about the
consumer's outstanding balance can make it almost impossible for a
"standalone" PPI provider to offer equivalent cover.
As a result, although the price of standalone PPI can be
significantly less than the price of PPI bought at the point of
sale, the standalone market remains limited in scope.
Remedies
The Commission is proposing a wide range of possible remedies to
address the competition concerns it has identified. These include a
complete ban on "credit point of sale" PPI, which it believes would
encourage customers to compare PPI products on a standalone basis
in the market and choose their own cover.
A further proposal would prohibit the sale of single-premium
policies, where the total premium is paid in a lump sum at the
beginning of the contract and usually added to the loan.
Additional measures are aimed at improving the information given
to customers in advertising and marketing material and at the point
of sale, enabling them to compare products and make informed
choices.
Information on PPI and credit products could also be made
available to comparison websites, market research companies and
publishers of best-buy tables.
Some of the proposals for improving customer awareness
complement the Financial Services Authority's new rules aimed at
improving PPI selling practices, which will come into effect in
July this year (see: The PPI rules in ICOBS,
an OUT-LAW Guide).
In addition, however, the Commission believes that making all
PPI polices annually renewable would give consumers a further
chance to compare products and switch provider if they can find a
better deal.
In order for these remedies to start having an effect and give
rise to lower premiums, the Commission is also proposing a
temporary price cap on PPI premiums for a limited period.
Alan Davis, a competition law specialist at Pinsent Masons,
said: "This is an unusual and highly interventionist remedy for the
Commission to propose. The Commission has previously considered –
but has always avoided – the imposition of price caps in its
investigations of other financial services products, such as home
credit and store cards."
Nick Starling, the ABI's Director of General Insurance at the
Association of British Insurers, believes the proposals may kill
rather than cure.
"We acknowledge that there have been problems in the PPI market
and we have done a lot to change that; these changes now need time
to bed in," he said. "We are very concerned that the Competition
Commission's proposed remedies could destroy this market,
particularly while we are facing a period of economic uncertainty.
It would be disastrous to leave many people unprotected to deal
with unforeseen financial crisis".
The Competition Commission has invited views from interested
parties on its provisional findings and the proposed remedies by
30th June 2008, including views on whether there are any
alternative practical remedies. Its final report will be
published at the end of the year.
Want more content like this? This story was written by the insurance and reinsurance legal experts at Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM. See our legal info for Insurance and Reinsurance.
Disclaimer: We hope you find OUT-LAW’s content useful. It’s prepared by the lawyers at Pinsent Masons. Please remember, though, that it’s intended as general information only. It’s not legal advice. If that’s what you’re seeking, please
contact us. See also: our
full disclaimer
