Because the Guarantor buffers Generali and Unipol on Motor TPL
TPL auto, the Competition Authority fined UnipolSai and Generali for 5 million euros each. The reasons and the reply from Generali. The article by Emanuela Rossi
The two main insurance companies in the country have been sanctioned for unfair commercial practices in the settlement of Motor TPL damage.
The Competition and Market Authority fined UnipolSai and Generali for € 5 million each, the maximum allowed by law as regards consumer protection (the minimum is € 10 thousand). It should be remembered that Parliament has decided – in the transposition of EU directive 2019/2161 – not to apply the envisaged extension of the penalties from 2 to 4 percent of turnover to violations of the Consumer Code.
And the sanction "decidedly insufficient" speaks of the National Consumers Union according to which "the damage to consumers in this case is really considerable and corresponds to a gain of the insurance companies that is the result of this deceptive and aggressive practice. It should be provided by law that the fines of the Authorities must always exceed the illicit gain, otherwise they cannot have any deterrent effect ".
While Generali replies to the Guarantor's decision as follows: “We deem the charges attributed to us by the Competition and Market Authority 'for alleged improper practices relating to the settlement of third party liability claims' to be unfounded. For this commercial reason we intend to challenge the proceeding, trusting that its groundlessness will be confirmed, and we reserve the right to protect our corporate reputation in all appropriate fora ".
Here are all the details on the Antitrust decision and on the reply of the group led by the CEO, Philippe Donnet.
THE INCORRECT PRACTICES OF UNIPOLSAI AND GENERALI
Piazza Verdi had started the two investigations in November 2020 and extended them in May at the request of the two companies. Under the lens of the Authority led by Roberto Rustichelli , a commercial practice had ended "carried out – as stated in the Agcm note – through deceptive and aggressive conduct" starting from "dilatory, obstructive and / or unjustified refusal behavior, in relation to exercise the right of the injured party to access the claim file ".
From what emerges from the measures , it appears that UnipolSai and Generali responded late, with respect to the deadlines set by sector regulations, to numerous requests for access to the documents. In the case of Generali, the Antitrust still informs us, the late response or rejection of the requests for access also concerned those formulated before the company presented an offer for compensation or its refusal, at which time the injured party has not yet right of access. In these cases, the company did not communicate the inadmissibility of the request and did not log in once the claim assessment procedure was completed. UnipolSai, on the other hand, sometimes responded to the access request by making the documentation available at its Settlement Center despite the applicant having asked to receive it at home.
Furthermore, when deciding the reimbursement, the two companies did not provide relevant information on the amount or on the reasons for refusing compensation. Finally, the commercial practice "was carried out by imposing obstacles of various kinds to the exercise of the rights deriving from the motor liability insurance contract and without respecting the time limits set by the Private Insurance Code for the formulation of the offer or for its refusal" . Both in the case of Generali and in that of UnipolSai, there have been numerous incidents in which the offer or refusal was formulated late with respect to the deadline set by law. In the case of UnipolSai, further obstacles were also identified, such as the failure to respond to requests from consumers on the status of the case or the difficulty in making contact with the liquidator.
THE OPINION OF IVASS
Since the companies operate in the insurance sector, the Agcm last May 27 asked IVASS for an opinion, which arrived exactly one month later. In the document, the Supervisory Authority highlighted that "there is no doubt that the recognition of the right of access assumes great importance for the protection of the insured and the damaged and that therefore the companies themselves are required to meet the relevant access requests and complete in compliance with the terms of the law, without obstacles of any kind ".
According to what can be read in both closing measures, "the Authority's findings are set in the wake of the actions that IVASS has long taken to raise the level of clarity and transparency in the liquidation offer phase, with particular reference the need to clearly indicate the reasons underlying a possible refusal of the offer. In particular, with the Letter to the market of 15 December 2016 – the Antitrust points out -, IVASS, taking into account the complaints received, requested the companies to review the settlement processes and specifically communicate the reasons for the non-offer to the injured parties, and follows the degree of implementation of these indications through constant monitoring through the analysis of complaints, verifying compliance with the terms of the law and applying the related sanctions where the conditions are met ". In general, Ivass underlined in the opinion provided to the Authority, "any further step towards greater clarity in disclosing the reasons for a possible denial can only bring greater benefits to policyholders".
THE DECISIONS OF THE ANTITRUST
The Competition and Market Authority therefore “ascertained the incorrectness of this commercial practice, considered capable of considerably limiting the consumer's freedom of choice or behavior in relation to compensation for the claim”. In particular, as can be seen from the two closing measures, the conduct implemented by UnipolSai and by Generali “integrate an incorrect commercial practice, contrary to professional diligence, in violation of Articles 20, paragraph 2, 22, 24 and 25 lett. d) of the Consumer Code ". With their "deceptive and aggressive conduct", in essence, the two companies have "considerably limited the freedom of choice or behavior of the average consumer in relation to compensation for the accident or its denial, making him take a decision that he would not otherwise have taken. ".
Furthermore, both UnipolSai and Generali – who were "aware of the existence of the deceptive and aggressive behaviors described" – did not show "the normal degree of competence and attention that can reasonably be expected, having regard to the quality of the professional (of the company, ed. ) and the characteristics of the activity carried out ". In fact, due to "the inadequacy of the procedures adopted in the management of access requests and requests for compensation for damage and the absence of adequate monitoring systems", the injured consumer was forced "to suffer delays in violation of the established time limits. by sectoral legislation and / or obstacles of various kinds in finding access to the claim file and / or in the formulation of offers or their refusal and, as a consequence of the information deficiencies that characterize it, to accept or reject the compensation offer in unconsciously or to accept the denial of compensation without having the necessary elements to react to it ".
THE NOTE AND REPLICA OF GENERALI
“We believe that the charges attributed to us by the Competition and Market Authority 'for alleged improper practices relating to the settlement of third party liability claims' are unfounded. For this commercial reason we intend to challenge the proceeding, trusting that its groundlessness will be confirmed, and we reserve the right to protect our corporate reputation in all appropriate venues ". This was stated in a note by the group headed by Philippe Donnet: " Generali Italia – it is specified in the note – always guarantees the widest possible care and protection of damaged customers and third parties, also by promoting important and incisive anti-fraud actions, paying maximum attention to compliance with the rules at every stage of the claims settlement process. This commitment is reflected in all the main industrial and customer service indicators, and is also confirmed by the many public data available ”.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/economia/agcm-unipol-generali-rc-auto/ on Tue, 09 Aug 2022 13:37:14 +0000.