Legal expenses insurance, a value added product or just income? It was disappointing to see your front page article headed "Brokers failing on optional extras" (News, 6 April).
This is just the tip of the iceberg as to how motor legal expenses insurance is perceived - a cheap add-on that enables the intermediary to make money without thinking about the requirement to "treat the customer fairly".
Surely, FSA regulation will drive home the need to "actively sell motor legal expenses insurance" as a real value-added benefit that can provide the policyholder with a product that, when called upon, meets their needs and not just as a way of adding to the intermediaries business.
Are we that afraid as an industry to be transparent or are we again happy to fuel the anti-industry machine that exists because of past poor practices?
Business development manager