NRMA

2023年7月5日

可以透露。IAG前个人保险,安迪·康沃尔,周末从董事会辞职。康沃尔先生一直在执行角色“拔火罐”底价算法介绍,虽然他已离开这个位置,他是一个导演IAG的子公司。广告IAG保持在法庭上没有证据表明高级经理知道的任何未披露的影响折扣给客户,但正义温迪·亚伯拉罕说,这“提交忽略的高级职员参与实施拔火罐机制应该知道发生什么”。悉尼IAG的品牌包括问和NRMA,证实,康沃尔先生辞职后,联邦法院判决”。他不能置评,联邦法院法官温迪亚伯拉罕。这些最初错过折扣影响近611000客户采购NRMA盖房屋,汽车,船和商队。集中在IAG未能披露,一个算法改变了广告折扣。这实际上意味着,当一个溢价下降超过算法允许,客户基础保费”重新计算,增加了“所以折扣会在所需的范围。前一个系统申请折扣后任何地板和天花板的调整。 According to the documents filed in court, one of the reasons for implementing floor and ceiling mechanisms was to avoid client “price shock” by limiting rises or falls – with one risk being that a massive fall could stoke suspicions of being previously overcharged. Advertisement The new system was introduced as part of simplifying the processes within IAG. A personal insurance executive change committee, which included the then personal insurance chief, approved the funding in 2013 to introduce an automated solution for ceiling and floor price changes. In 2013, one technology worker emailed their superior saying the floor limiting option did not discuss the “market perception associated with offering a particular discount level and then adjusting the base premium to reduce the effective discount”. The worker wrote that it seemed inconsistent with IAG’s customer-focused strategy and asked “would anyone have any objections … asking for it to be made clearer to the exec”? Then in October 2015, after ASIC warned about disclosures and no-claims discounts, an IAG underwriting committee briefing pack discussed the issue. While a “working group was established to investigate NRMA’s no claims bonus discount, no changes were made”, a statement of agreed facts said. IAG was unable to answer multiple internal questions over the years regarding what happened, only for an external consultant to raise the issue in 2019 and trigger an internal investigation. Advertisement The board was notified and IAG then filed a breach notice to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission. It was followed by a cascade of nine more breach notices about other pricing issues, as the Financial Review revealed, with gross costs surpassing $500 million . An IAG spokesman told the Financial Review that since identifying the problem, the insurer had been providing refunds and strengthening its risk management systems to “help prevent these issues happening again”. More than $100 million had been spent on upgrading capabilities, he said. Among the changes are that any potential risk registered by employees must be assessed within five days, and possibly escalated until matters are dealt with. Liam Walsh is a reporter with the Australian Financial Review Email Liam at liam.walsh@fairfaxmedia.com.au Save