Cila hopes of professional equality depend on a better dialogue with the ABI, says Andy Cook
Are loss adjusters mad? For months and months, loss adjusters have been clamouring for regulation by the FSA. While brokers and insurers have been grumbling about increasing FSA regulation, loss adjusters are lobbying hard.
The lobby reached fever pitch at last week's Cila annual general meeting held in the Forest of Arden. Shaun Mundy, who is the head of authorisation for the FSA's high street firms division, addressed over 100 baying loss adjusters.
And despite a well co-ordinated attack during the question and answer session, the loss adjusters were unable to alter Mundy's blunt message: loss adjusters will not be regulated.
Without FSA regulation, loss adjusters feel that their status is lower than that of insurers and brokers, who are deemed worthy of regulation. Loss adjusters also feel that compulsory regulation would give them leverage in their dealings with insurers.
Many loss adjusters feel that they cannot do a professional job because the buying power of insurers has suppressed fees - so if there were a minimum service standard then they could use it in negotiations.
Mundy reckons that loss adjusters need to work harder on the industry's claims code, which, being voluntary, is not always adhered to by insurers.
A more progressive dialogue with the ABI is needed here perhaps. And that could be a problem if past experiences are anything to go by.
It seems that a flood disaster management plan drawn up by Cila for York at the behest of the ABI has been put on the back burner - something that Cila is not too happy about.
But all hopes of compulsory regulation are not dead. As Mundy said, it's now in the hands of the Treasury.
Well, I won't be holding my breath.