Regarding your story "Broker fury at service level slur" (8 May, Insurance Times), I am happy to see that leading bodies in the insurance industry are fighting hard for better regulation of the broking industry.
Speaking as someone who works outside the insurance industry, but deals with many clients of it (namely, our readers), there is little doubt that the general consensus seems to be that brokers and insurers need to provide better guarantees of their service - especially when attempting to justify higher premiums and less available cover.
Many other sectors (including the charity one) are now under severe pressure to be more transparent and accountable, and the insurance industry is no exception to this: customers demand, and deserve it.
Regarding the comments attributed to Carl Woodroffe, I would like to point out that the article we originally ran was not an "attack on the broking fraternity", but on those unscrupulous few which bring down the excellent service of the whole industry.
This, in itself, brings the need for benchmarking into even stronger focus as it would undoubtedly be of benefit for the reputable firms (of which I know MCIS is one) to be able to distance themselves from the cowboy outfits that infiltrate every industry - not just broking.
The fact that bodies such as the ABI, IIB, OFT, and GISC appear united in their acknowledgement, and subsequent condemnation, of such practices only goes to show that for brokers and insurers to attempt to pass the blame onto each other achieves precisely nothing.
Send letters to Insurance Times, 30 Cannon Street, London, EC4M 6YJ or email
or fax 020 7618 3499