Following Standard Life and Abbey for Intermediaries' decision to reveal declined claims statistics ...
Following Standard Life and Abbey for Intermediaries' decision to reveal declined claims statistics for critical illness (CI), it seems another debate surrounding the product's total permanent disability (TPD) benefit is brewing.
Publishing declined claims statistics is a bold move, but could digging deeper into the reasons behind the 50% of declined TPD claims be a bigger move towards clarity and transparency in the industry?
TPD seems to have inherent flaws and guests at COVER's latest Think Tank debate agreed that the benefit is certainly a cause for concern. There, calls were made for a review of the benefit, in particular, to help consumers and advisers gain a better understanding of the reasons behind declinature rates.
The ABI working party has admitted that while TPD needs addressing, it will not be looking at the benefit during this consultation process, which begs the question - when will this happen?
Reviewing the CI definitions should encompass the entire product, and as part of the offering, TPD should be included, especially as half of all claims are declined. The working party has said that this review is crucial if CI is to remain a viable product going forward. But will leaving TPD as it stands hinder this development?
Obviously the working party has its work cut out with this current CI review, but TPD is proving to be a problem. And if the ABI working party admits it cannot look at TPD this time, then perhaps it is down to the industry as a whole to look at the issues surrounding the benefit.
Only by looking at the issues involved and tackling them head on, can anything be achieved.
Angela Faherty, editor
