The survey found that 32 per cent offered policies from two to three providers; 14 per cent used four to five providers, while 2 per cent used six to 10 providers. In contrast, 20 per cent of survey respondents sourced PPI from the whole market.
AMI members who did not offer PPI were also quizzed on the reasons behind their choice. 36 per cent said they offered alternatives such as income protection instead, while 26 per cent felt PPI was ‘poor value’. Critical illness cover was offered as an alternative by 87 per cent of brokers, while 37 per cent said private medical insurance was offered to clients.
Rob Griffiths, associate director at AMI, said: “These are important findings in light of the Office of Fair Trading’s (OFT) study and its proposed referral to the Competition Commission, which included mortgage payment protection insurance (MPPI).
“The OFT’s study suggested brokers were not offering their clients a choice of MPPI from a variety of providers. Our research reveals that the majority are offering the policies of more than one provider with a fifth providing ‘whole of market’ access.”
However, Simon Burgess, managing director of britishinsurance.com, said: “I agree with the OFT’s referral, and the sooner it gets to grips with the market, the better. Too many brokers fail to do a whole market search and many are tied to one lender based on the premise that they pay the most commission.”
