RGA head of claims Peter Barrett, a member of the working party, says the group is currently looking at new descriptions for TPD but says he is keen to hear what suggestions IFAs have.
He says: “What about IFAs? They have got to sit down and explain this stuff. We would like to hear their suggestions on a new name.
“At the moment peoples’ expectations are not being managed. We need a new name and we need a description that is clear. How can we describe the ‘T’ or the ‘P’ in a better way?”
In November the ABI said it is rebranding and standardising TPD due to the confusion around the phrase, but added further consultation was needed on the issue.
ABI assistant director of health and protection Nick Kirwan says: “The jury is still out on whether we have a collective name and if so what that might be.”
He says there is currently one candidate, but adds: “What we normally do is come up with three or four different suggestions which come at it from different angles and we will test them with consumers in March and April.
“We haven’t had any IFA input on new names so far but if anybody has any suggestions we would be happy to listen.”
Kirwan says the industry will have the opportunity to offer feedback formally when it consults on the TPD changes in May. He adds: “And I hope that IFAs will take part in that.”
A final consultation paper is due in June.
Lifesearch senior policy adviser Matt Morris says: “If the name is changed it’s something that needs to be carefully considered. After all, the problems with TPD are much more than just a name, it has poor claims rates, and that needs to be addressed first.”
Protection Review chief executive Kevin Carr says: “I’d drop the word total – a broken leg can be totally broken, but a claim won’t be paid just for that.
“So, permanent disability with an added phrase explaining you will not be able to work again, for example.”
Any more suggestions out there?