CNCEF Patrimoine
CNCEF
CNCEF Patrimoine was chartered in January 2006 for the defence and promotion of the role of financial advisers and intermediaries in Europe.
ID: 758264827050-05
Lobbying Activity
Response to DA on conduct of business rules for the distribution of insurance-based investment products
17 Aug 2017
If we agree that manufacturers shall continuously monitor and regularly review insurance products they have brought to the market, shall identify issues and take appropriate action, we consider that they couldn’t systematically inform customers about the remedial action taken as they might have no direct contact with the concerned customers.
Moreover, we consider that manufacturers should inform insurance distributors not only about the remedial action taken but also about the events that may adversely affect the customer of that product.
It should be expressly confirmed that insurance distributors could distribute insurance products to customers who do not belong to the target market identified by the manufacturer.
We need further explanation, particularly with regard to the definition of the insurance undertaking “substantially involved in the management or development of insurance-based investment products”. Indeed, the term “management” is too ambiguous and might generate legal uncertainty.
We consider that the terms “better” (“which would better meet the customer's needs”), “predominantly” (“predominantly based on quantitative commercial criteria”) and “mainly” (“entirely or mainly paid at the moment of the conclusion of the insurance contract”) are too ambiguous and might generate legal uncertainty.
We consider that the information to be obtained for the purposes of the assessment of suitability (Article 9.3) should also include information on customer’s personal needs and objectives (family protection…).
Furthermore, we consider that the analysis of the costs and benefits (Article 9.7) should be removed as it is not required by IDD Level 1.
We agree that the insurance intermediary's shall not be reduced due to the fact that advice on insurance-based investment products is provided in whole or in part through an automated or semi-automated system.
However, we consider that it would be necessary to define the terms “automated or semi-automated system”.
Read full responseResponse to DA on product oversight and governance requirements for insurance undertakings and insurance distributors
17 Aug 2017
If we agree that manufacturers shall continuously monitor and regularly review insurance products they have brought to the market, shall identify issues and take appropriate action, we consider that they couldn’t systematically inform customers about the remedial action taken as they might have no direct contact with the concerned customers.
Moreover, we consider that manufacturers should inform insurance distributors not only about the remedial action taken but also about the events that may adversely affect the customer of that product.
It should be expressly confirmed that insurance distributors could distribute insurance products to customers who do not belong to the target market identified by the manufacturer.
We need further explanation, particularly with regard to the definition of the insurance undertaking “substantially involved in the management or development of insurance-based investment products”. Indeed, the term “management” is too ambiguous and might generate legal uncertainty.
We consider that the terms “better” (“which would better meet the customer's needs”), “predominantly” (“predominantly based on quantitative commercial criteria”) and “mainly” (“entirely or mainly paid at the moment of the conclusion of the insurance contract”) are too ambiguous and might generate legal uncertainty.
We consider that the information to be obtained for the purposes of the assessment of suitability (Article 9.3) should also include information on customer’s personal needs and objectives (family protection…).
Furthermore, we consider that the analysis of the costs and benefits (Article 9.7) should be removed as it is not required by IDD Level 1.
We agree that the insurance intermediary's shall not be reduced due to the fact that advice on insurance-based investment products is provided in whole or in part through an automated or semi-automated system.
However, we consider that it would be necessary to define the terms “automated or semi-automated system”.
Read full response