View more on these topics

PI premiums increase as advisers express fears over unregulated investments

More than 40 per cent of advisers saw their professional indemnity insurance bills increase at their most recent renewal, a new survey suggests.

In a poll of 250 advisers conducted for Money Marketing by Schroders, just five per cent reported finding a cheaper deal the last time they renewed their cover.

Just over 60 per cent of advisers surveyed said they thought PI was too expensive for advisers, while only one of the 220 advisers to respond to the question said it was too cheap.

38 per cent rated the cost of cover as ‘about right’.

Only eight per cent of advisers reported having a PI renewal period longer than 24 months. Half had renewal periods lasting less than a year.

The vast majority, 88 per cent, said they had seen no increase or decrease in their renewal length over the last five years however.

Just 10 per cent said PI should cover unregulated investments. 42 per cent said unregulated investments should be excluded and 45 per cent said they remained unsure.

PI was thrust back into the spotlight in light of the FCA’s recent review of Financial Services Compensation Scheme funding. The regulator had sounded out ideas such as introducing mandatory terms on policies, limits on excesses and enforced run-off cover, but stopped short of proposing such measures in the end.

Has the FCA gone far enough to tackle PI problems?

New rules will be introduced to try to ensure PI pays out in a higher proportion cases where the FSCS is involved to reduce the burden on the lifeboat fund.


Tapering of annual allowance – adjusted and threshold income

The definitions of adjusted income and threshold income used to determine whether, and to what extent, someone’s annual allowance will be reduced can be confusing.  Here we try to make sense of it all. The annual allowance will be reduced for high income individuals from 6 April 2016.  Our previous article Tapering of annual allowance […]


FCA takes action against unauthorised car park investment scheme

An unauthorised airport car parking investment scheme operator has closed some of its schemes following discussions with the FCA. According to a notice on the FCA website, Park First Limited, and related entities, was promoting and running the investment schemes. The FCA took the view they were collective investment schemes, which only authorised firms or […]

Ros Altmann

Ros Altmann: Peer pressure to improve consumer protection

Some exciting legislation has just been through the House of Lords. Thanks to dedicated work by peers across all sides, the Financial Guidance and Claims Bill includes significant improvements to consumer protection in connection with cold-calling, help for vulnerable people, rescheduling debts and regulation of claims management companies. The Bill aims to merge guidance bodies […]


News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up


There are 4 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. Mine hasn’t, but then I don’t do high risk business. The nearest we get to it is reccomending DM’s to operate AIM portfolios.

  2. Other than because of a bad claims record in mainstream lines of business, the only basis on which PI insurers are reasonably entitled to increase premiums is if they’re already providing cover in respect of unregulated investments which, I suspect, the vast majority don’t. So all the liabilities for mis-sales of unregulated investments which are being taken on by the FSCS are of no relevance to them.

  3. Not sure about some of the points in this article. PI renewal periods longer than 24 months? Also I am sure that we have just finally established that PI is not meant to protect the FSCS and no new rules are going to be introduced. Insurers cannot be made to pay out on a higher proportion of cases.

Leave a comment