Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

View from City Road: Norwich pays for taking its eye off the ball

Tuesday 29 March 1994 17:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

What is wrong with Norwich Union? One of Britain's largest insurance companies has had to suspend its life insurance sales people because regulators fear that too many of them are undertrained or otherwise incompetent. If Norwich Union cannot train its sales people properly, what else might be going wrong?

The answer, sadly, is plenty. Over the past few years Norwich Union, one of the best names in the business, has been dogged by problems.

Back in 1990, Norwich Union was one of the first insurers found to have inadequate control over its tied agents. Going into the recession, it found itself with a property portfolio described yesterday by its chief investment manager as 'absurdly overweight'.

Solvency rapidly became a serious concern, a problem compounded by the company's foolishly large sales of with-profits bonds - contracts that impose a substantial financial strain. Norwich Union was forced to abandon a market that it had dominated and to switch an enormous amount of money into government securities. On top of this, it was attracting criticism for poor administration and sharing in the industry's huge losses on general insurance.

Although general insurance is back in profit, this is not an impressive record for Allan Bridgewater, chief executive since 1989. With Lautro, the life insurance regulator, still monitoring the situation closely, it is probably not the end of Norwich Union's embarrassments. It is difficult to see why, in a close call, any independent financial adviser would recommend Norwich Union ahead of peer companies such as Standard Life and Scottish Amicable.

The honourable men at the top of the life insurance industry have been caught out repeatedly by underestimating the harsher environment, both regulatory and commercial, of the 1990s. They have been slow to recognise the need for higher standards and to take account of the changing requirements of customers.

Little wonder, then, that there is little confidence in the industry's ability to put its house in order. The beleaguered Personal Investment Authority, the proposed investor protection agency, is headed by Joe Palmer - another insurance man whose former company (Legal & General) has found itself in trouble with the regulators.

As a mutual, the external disciplines on Norwich Union are weak, though this is not an explanation for its problems; some of the best insurers, such as Standard Life, are also mutuals.

The best practical hope for Norwich Union is Philip Scott. Fresh from tackling the solvency problems, he has taken control of the UK life operations. Norwich Union must hope he gets it right. It cannot afford many more mistakes.

Mr Bridgewater, by the way, is chairman of the Association of British Insurers, and Mr Palmer was chairman from 1989-91. Mr Bridgewater's immediate predecessor, Ian Rushton, found himself shunted rapidly sideways at Royal Insurance as his company crashed to enormous losses. The chairmanship is beginning to look something of a poison chalice, and perhaps a sell sign where public companies are involved.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in