Chatswood serves the life and health insurance sector in New Zealand with market intelligence, data, and bespoke consulting services. Some of these are provided in conjunction with Quality Product Research Limited - a subsidiary that brings you Quotemonster.
We believe that good decisions are more likely to occur when we have good information about the market environment in which we operate. Intuitive leaps and creative decisions are always required, of course, but the more they are based on a firm foundation of observation, the better they tend to be.
Jon-Paul Hale critiques insurers' use of “MedSafe indicated” wording in policies
Jon-Paul Hale critiques insurers' use of 'MedSafe indicated' wording in policies, saying if clinicians and customers were more aware of what the wording meant they may change their treatment plans.
Jon-Paul Hale critiques insurers' use of 'MedSafe indicated' wording in policies, saying if clinicians and customers were more aware of what the wording meant they may change their treatment plans to ensure that coverage extends to the use of the medicine.
In policy wordings, “MedSafe indicated” can significantly limit access to treatment; where MedSafe guidelines include "indicated first-line treatment", this means the medication is only authorised for use as the first treatment. Hale suggests that clients consider any mediations with ‘first-line’ indications may wish to be treated with these medications first, as insurers are unlikely to approve them for later use.
What may surprise you is that many, many, medicines are prescribed that are outside Medsafe indications. Some are prescribed even though the medicine is unapproved for any purpose in New Zealand. Several insurers will not cover medicines that are unapproved. Obtaining a Medsafe approval for the use of a medicine can be time consuming and expensive. We are a small market and some disorders are rare. That means that while it may be economically viable to gain approvals in the United States and Europe, sometimes the New Zealand market may be too small for these companies to consider seeking approval economically viable, especially when some medical professionals will still prescribe an unapproved medicine.
At Quality Product Research Limited we are committed to ensuring that research scores are descriptive of these differences, which are increasingly important. There is a review of the non-PHARMAC coverage item in our health / medical insurance research which is being consulted on right now. If you would like to participate in the review please contact us. Results of the review will be announced at our forthcoming national roadshow which runs from 23 July to 29 August. Register for the roadshow, at a venue near you, here.
References:
Medsafe – about and role: https://www.medsafe.govt.nz/other/about.asp
Medsafe – use of Unapproved Medicines and Unapproved Use of Medicines: https://medsafe.govt.nz/profs/riss/unapp.asp#need
More daily news:
Partners Life campaign top in the 2023 Global Effie Rankings - insurance category
AIA recognised as one of the most diverse insurance companies
AM Best withdraws ratings for Accuro
Philip Macalister discusses research on areas advisers can improve in
Retirement Commissioner proposes 15 recommendations aimed at enhancing KiwiSaver
The FSC continues to call for review into KiwiSaver settings
Health New Zealand orders hiring freeze on all non-frontline roles
AMP settles with Australian financial advisers for A$100 million
AMP has settled a legal dispute with hundreds of Australian financial advisers affected by unilateral changes to buyer-of-last-resort (BOLR) terms.
AMP has settled a legal dispute with hundreds of Australian financial advisers affected by unilateral changes to buyer-of-last-resort (BOLR) terms. After a long-running legal dispute AMP has settled, with no admission of liability, for A$100 million.
In August 2019 AMP made unilateral changes to adviser contracts that meant BOLR multiples were cut by almost 40%, from 4 times recurring revenue to 2.5 times (excluding grandfathered commissions).
In July an Australian Federal Court decision found AMP erred in altering the buyer-of-last-resort terms for two advice businesses operating under its brand. Justice Moshinsky ruled in favour of the two Australian advisory firms who bought suit, awarding Equity Financial Planners A$813,000 and Wealthstone A$115,000 and opening AMP up to 120 or more similar claims. AMP lodged an appeal in October but opted to settle following a mediation process in November.
More daily news:
Jon-Paul Hale questions whether non-smoker rates are non-smoker rates
AIA Group has announced the publication of its inaugural climate transition plan
$100 million programme for specialist mental health services is behind schedule
Southern Cross responds to accusations it dropped a $60k benefit without informing customers or advisers
Southern Cross has refuted a Good Returns article where advisers complained about not being informed about Southern Cross dropping a $60,000 a year benefit for non-surgical hospitalisations.
Southern Cross removed the non-surgical hospitalisation benefit as part of the Society’s benefit review in 2020, and Southern Cross’ head of customer strategy and experience, Nic Johnson has said that “Members were communicated with at the time of the benefit change.”
Johnson said that Southern Cross advisers were informed of the changes at the time via a virtual meeting, and that the company’s adviser gateway portal to manage their customers’ policies had information on the changes also.
Johnson said
“The original intention of the non-surgical hospitalisation benefit was as a 'catch-all' for eligible healthcare services that required in-hospital medical treatment. Based on a 2019 review of our claims data, which showed that the benefit was not widely utilised, it was assessed that this benefit was no longer fit-for-purpose.”
“The majority of medical (or hospitalisation) claims at the time were already covered under existing benefits, such as the surgical procedures, chemotherapy, radiotherapy and diagnostic tests/imaging benefits.”
We have commented on the change here.
Quality Product Research are in the process of conducting a review of the score for the feature, giving Southern Cross time to respond with more details of equivalent benefits being present in other parts of the medical insurance. We will raise the results of the review with our Southern Research Advisory Board next month – and update research subscribers immediately.
More daily news:
Katrina Shanks writes about whether cryptocurrencies are a safe investment
Rob Hennin talks about why he loves working in the insurance sector
Southern Cross funds the ‘Under One Umbrella’ report on mental health and addictions
nib publishes their top five medical claims for July
Quotemonster online roadshow confirmed!
The Quotemonster team have just spent four weeks on the road visiting 15 towns seeing hundreds of advisers. We have received so much great feedback and requests for an online one for those who couldn’t make it.
So now is your last chance to see what all the hype is about. Our online session will be held Wednesday 23 August at 9.30am.
9.30am - 10.30am - Presentation and Demonstration ✅
10.30am - 11.00am - Q&A ✅
We will be covering new tech and new tools:
- New comparisons
- New AI tools to make your life easier
- New ways to make your advice process better, safer, and quicker
Presented by Aneel Ravji, Kelly Pulham and Russell Hutchinson.
Click here to register: https://zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_OuTZihV9TY-MnmMxqkWw6w#/registration
Quotemonster in Palmerston North!
Thank you for hosting us Palmerston North, we hoped you enjoyed the session!
We have one more week of our roadshow and if you’re interested in attending, please click here to see our remaining dates and locations!
Research updates: what you need to know!
QPR Database V15.2A released
Our Research team have made some monstrously good updates to the QPR database recently. If you’ve noticed we’re running a bit slower than usual, please refresh your page and scroll down to ensure that you’re on our latest version – QPR V.15.2A | WEB V4.3.9.
Our latest updates include:
Cigna rebrand to Chubb Life – this has been live on Quotemonster since the brands launch in March, however all rebranded documents can now be accessed by database subscribers.
Kiwibank rebrand to nib effective 1 June 2023 – more information on this here.
MAS - policy document update for Life & Income Protection effective 1 December 2021, with product rating changes in Income Protection (indemnity) – rating applied in Vocational and Rehabilitation Support .
Research for Partners Life Immediate Trauma Buyback and Asteron Life’s Continuous Trauma is available when Instant Trauma Buyback is selected.
ANZ – policy document update for Life & Living effective 6 March 2023, however, this has not affected product ratings.
Other Research remediations include:
Medical: Exclusions
Income Protection: Insurable Income and Inflation Adjustment
Trauma: Heart Attack
TPD: Benefit Definition over 65
If you have any questions regarding these please feel free to email us on info@quotemonster.co.nz
Happy Crunching!
Quality Product Research: FAQ – can research ratings be altered?
We hope this explanation can provide more clarity on how our research works.
Our objective is to be a tool for advisers to highlight the material differences between products, rather than a view of ranking them from best to worse, therefore, advisers are able to select their product and provider basket to what they are qualified to advise on (i.e., they can remove providers and alter products where required). However, in reality, price is also a significant factor during the advice process and both our pricing comparison and research rating are used by advisers to justify why a selection is being made - along with other information and views you may have, of course.
For example, ideally an adviser will select all agreed value base products under non-taxable (agreed value).
In this set, Partners Life may have a research rating advantage, but pricing disadvantage, assuming current settings.
If an adviser then decides they want to remove Partners, for whatever reason (perhaps they have no accreditation with them), this removes Partners Life from being shown in the premium comparison however, it would be inaccurate to then bump AIA to 100% because in this specific set Partners Life still has the highest score.
When it comes to Options and Extras packages, in an ideal world, an adviser would select the best products in the set to compare and again will have to consider the pricing comparison and research rating as a package.
Fidelity has a pricing advantage (cheapest in this set) and a research advantage in this example below.
However, removing Fidelity will remove the provider from appearing in the premium comparison, but it will not alter the research comparison – they still have the highest rating in the set and the other companies are benchmarked against this.
We believe it would be inaccurate if advisers were allowed to remove a company to then alter research ratings. They can, however, alter products but have to be able to justify it from a pricing and rating perspective.
We hope this provides some insight into how research ratings work and if there is a specific topic you would like us to share on, please send us an email on info@quotemonster.co.nz