The FSA has asked privacy regulator the Information
Commissioner's Office (ICO), though, to investigate whether
companies should tell users when their data will be sold to third
parties.
The Financial Services Authority (FSA) found in May that
insurance aggregator, or price comparison, websites were providing
quotes improperly, without allowing consumers to change or even see
the assumptions made about them to generate policy prices.
The FSA has now conducted a follow up review of some of the 17
sites covered by its initial investigation and found significant
improvements.
"Many sites have made significant improvements and are
consistently providing clear, fair and not misleading information,"
said the FSA in a statement. "The vast majority of firms have
clear, fair and not misleading adverts."
The FSA still has concerns, though, about the degree to which
aggregators allow consumers to make informed decisions about a
complex product such as insurance.
"The FSA has identified two specific areas where some firms need
to make further improvements," the regulator said. "[These are:]
obtaining better information from insurers about the level of
excesses that apply to insurance policies; and making more clear
the assumptions about consumers' needs and circumstances that some
websites use to obtain quotes."
The FSA's investigation found that some companies are not
showing what of the quoted excess is compulsory and what is
voluntary. Where this is because the aggregator was not provided
with the information, that is not made clear to the consumer.
It also found that there were problems about the assumptions
made by insurers and aggregators.
"Insurance aggregators make assumptions to generate quotes
quickly," the FSA's report said. "In the area of motor insurance,
examples of such assumptions in relation to the main driver and/or
the vehicle are that the applicant is the main driver of the car
and not a professional driver; that the applicant has been driving
regularly since the date that his licence was issued, or that the
vehicle is not a van or commercial vehicle and is not used for
hire, trade or delivery."
"Where assumptions were made, they were not always set out
clearly," it said. "For example, some firms were hiding away
assumptions within the 'small print' of the firm's 'Terms and
Conditions'. We expect firms to make sure that any assumptions are
clearly and prominently signposted on their websites and at all
relevant stages of the customer's online 'journey'."
The FSA also looked at firms' advertising and found that it,
too, was largely fair and clear and did not mislead consumers.
The FSA welcomed the improvements that have been made in the
past six months.
“We are pleased that firms have made improvements in the
information they provide," said Dan Waters, the FSA's director of
retail policy and conduct risk. "But it is imperative that all
comparison websites provide clear information so that consumers can
make informed decisions. We have contacted all websites involved in
our review, to set out our findings and the standards we expect.
Where needed, we are requiring firms to take prompt action to
address our remaining concerns."
The FSA said that it had asked the ICO to investigate whether or
not aggregators must tell customers that their data will be sold to
third parties. It said that the issue was raised in its
investigations, but that it lay within the ICO's remit.
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
