Churn keeps coming up in discussions, everywhere. In the insurers, with advisers, and with regulators.

Jon-Paul Hale

So if it is the same basic products, with the same levels of cover and relatively the same premium I would suggest that is not a bad definition.

However, even these can look like churn and not be.

• Did they get disclosure right? So the move is to address the underlying problem where the existing insurer would remove the cover or apply significant terms that another provider would not do.
• Is there a particular situation for the client with their circumstances that an alternative provider will respond better to?

Most of the time when the term churn is trotted out it is a case of sour grapes. Also, the providers complaining are usually the ones that have encouraged it the most.