Insurance

The great commission shake-up

Thursday 5th of November 2009

Four life companies have altered commission payments of late, including AXA, which has presented new terms for persistency and upfront commissions; and AMP, which has made revisions to its adviser business terms.

Of particular interest, however, are changes by Sovereign and Fidelity Life, which are taking very different approaches to structuring commissions. Sovereign has moved to offer a fixed basic initial commission of 230% for all TotalCareMax Life Cover, Rate for Age policies, while Fidelity Life has introduced a new service commission and deferred initial commission.

Fidelity Life's Commission Supplement states that service commission will be paid to intermediaries that have a risk in-force book greater than $100,000 and that can demonstrate they are maintaining their clients. It also states that advisers must spread at least 20% of initial commission, with initial commission spread into the second and subsequent years referred to as deferred initial commission.

Chatswood Consulting principal Russell Hutchinson says Sovereign, which tends to pay more upfront commission than Fidelity Life, has chosen to focus on paying individuals. Fidelity Life, meanwhile, has been growing fast and has a loyal client base.

"Fidelity is only nudging them one step towards taking more spread commission, which they know adds to their business value anyway," Hutchinson says.

Life Brokers Association president Rob Flood says more needs to be done to attract new clients into the market, rather than existing policies being churned between insurers touting enhanced benefits.

"The churn is something that is a real worry, both for clients and companies," he says.

Flood says Fidelity Life recognises that its Platinum offering is a good, well rated product.

"The commission is only one side of the equation, the policy benefits and features are much more important than commissions selling products," he says.

Flood says Sovereign have extended the period the policy needs to be on the broker's book to actually receive the higher commission.

"It's been a double-sided sword really. You get more commission but the policy has got to go longer," he says.

Comments (2)
Ron Flood
No, 'Billy the Kid' we are not angelic brokers, and yes we do replace clients policies in situations where they will be significantly advantaged. What I am referring to is the practice wherby so called 'independant advisers' do Risk Audits on client's existing policies and then churn them to another company. One of the reasons that they have to churn to a new company is they only have 2 or 3 agency agreements and are unable to receive adequate compensation if they advise the client to make alterations to existing cover which may indeed be the best for the client. This unfortunately happens when 'independant' brokers have to place a large portion of their business (85-90%)with the one company. The rational for the churn is that the new policy has a better 'x' benefit or a better 'y' benefit. The fact that other equally important benefits are inferior appears to be conveniently ignored by these brokers. As far as not upsetting the underwriting,some companies are quick to get business on the books without comprehensive medical notes from Doctors but can't get this information quick enough at claim time. The thrust of my original comments to Good Returns was that we should be out there looking for new clients rather than recycling the existing ones. Replaceing policies is, as you suggest, always going to happen. We advisers need to make sure it is for the right reasons.
0 0
15 years ago

Ron Flood
I agree with Billy and infact broached the subject with the CEO's attending the Round Table forum Good return's hosted prior to the IFA conference. On the one hand companies take a dim view of brokers who 'churn' business away from their company, and yet on the other hand,offer to waive the suicide clause and the trauma stand down period on replacement business they receive.
0 0
15 years ago

Comments to GoodReturns.co.nz go through an approval process. Comments which are defamatory, abusive or in some way deemed inappropriate will not be approved.