It’s an emotive narrative. But it isn’t the whole story.
At Consumer Intelligence, our role is to shine a light on what’s really happening, using data and insight to separate signal from noise. And our intelligence suggests a more complex and more hopeful picture.
The claims satisfaction story is more nuanced
Our benchmarking of customer satisfaction in home insurance claims tells a story of disruption and recovery.
- Pre-2023: Customers who had made a claim consistently reported high levels of satisfaction, often higher than those who had not claimed.
- 2023 onwards: Satisfaction dipped. This was no coincidence. The post-COVID economy was turbulent: building materials became more expensive, skilled labour was hard to find, and supply chains buckled. Claims took longer, cost more, and customer frustration grew.
- 2024–25: The trend is reversing. Our data shows clear improvement in claims satisfaction over the last 12 months as insurers adapted, processes improved, and external pressures eased.
The insight here is important: the dip was not caused by systemic malpractice, but by macroeconomic realities. And critically, recovery is underway.
Not all firms are equal
Which? paints a picture of widespread failure. But our benchmarking data shows variation is significant. Some firms are struggling but others are setting the bar for excellence, with high levels of claims satisfaction even during the most challenging periods.
This difference matters. It shows that strong claims handling is possible, even under strain. And it highlights a danger: if the industry is judged solely on the weakest performers, the best practice of the leaders is ignored.
The real task is not to condemn the whole market, but to understand why some firms outperform and how others can learn from them.
Essentials products: inclusion or hidden risk?
One of the underexplored dynamics in this debate is the rise of “essentials” products. These were born in the wake of the FCA’s General Insurance Pricing Practices (GIPP) reforms, designed to ensure affordability and fairness. Essentials products give financially vulnerable households access to protection that might otherwise be out of reach.
But there is a trade-off. Slimmed-down products inevitably cover less. And when a claim is made, consumers may find themselves under-protected. This raises a critical question: are the very products designed to help vulnerable consumers inadvertently putting them at risk of harm?
Which? is right to highlight harm, but wrong to ignore this structural shift in the market. Essentials products are part of the picture and they require careful scrutiny if affordability and protection are to co-exist.
The profit question
The FCA’s own June report into pricing concluded there was no evidence of excess profits being made in the market. That conclusion matters because it changes the regulatory context.
If firms are not making excessive margins, then enforcing stricter rules or heavier oversight may not result in “fairer” outcomes. Instead, it risks raising the cost of doing business, which will almost certainly feed through into higher premiums. That makes protection less affordable, especially for those already struggling.
In other words, the wrong kind of regulatory response could make the problem worse, not better.
What “good” should look like
The super-complaint has succeeded in sparking debate. But the next step is not simply to enforce harder or to design rules that raise costs. What’s needed is a fundamental rethink of what “good” looks like in insurance.
-
For consumers: Good means clear policies, fair outcomes at the point of claim, and confidence that protection will work when they need it.
-
For insurers: Good means the ability to compete on quality, not just price, with commercial space to invest in customer service and innovation.
-
For regulators: Good means recognising variation in firm performance, targeting poor practice without punishing strong performers, and ensuring interventions do not unintentionally harm affordability.
-
For the economy: Good means a sustainable insurance sector that underpins household resilience and supports long-term confidence in financial protection.
The role of Consumer Intelligence
Consumer Intelligence exists to provide clarity. We see beyond anecdote, beyond headlines, and beyond broad-brush condemnation. Our data tells us:
-
The claims satisfaction picture is improving.
-
Not all firms are equal, some are delivering excellent outcomes today.
-
Product design, particularly essentials cover, may be contributing to consumer harm in ways not fully recognised.
-
Regulatory action must tread carefully to avoid increasing costs without improving value.
The real opportunity lies in using insight to shape a market where “good” is defined clearly, measured consistently, and rewarded visibly. That’s how to rebuild trust, protect consumers, and deliver value for all stakeholders.
The super-complaint may have started the conversation. But the real question now is this: how do we design an insurance market that works not just for consumers, but for shareholders, for regulators, and for the economy at large?
Submit a comment