Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Zurich Claims Quarterly JournalSpring 2020
Get started here
Contents
Welcome 3
Personalising the customer experience through technology: Our Motor Claims Portal 4
Driverless Cars – Where Are We Heading? 5
Zurich Motor Risk Proposition 7
Intelligence Led Solutions 8
Our recent fraud saving successes:
Fraud on the dancefloor 10
Motor Fraud Case Study 12
Innovations in the motor claim journey 14
Flexibility in a changing world 16
In Focus: Our Rehabilitation Team 17
2Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Contents
Welcome
Calum McPhailHead of Liability, Motor Technical & Complex Claims
+44 (0) 7734 336709
Scott ClaytonFraud & Investigations Manager
+44 (0) 1489 562477
Dear Readers,
Just when we thought that 2019 had been an eventful year, 2020 arrived and so far it has proved to be a year like no other we have experienced. Amidst an unprecedented situation we know that this is an unsettling time. We want to reassure you that we continue striving to provide high levels of service to our customers. To help, we have built a dedicated webpage answering frequently asked questions. You can find this at Zurich.co.uk/insurance/coronavirus.In this issue we explore the underlying developments within the wider motor industry and the need to maintain our own focus on adapting and preparing ourselves for today and for the future.
This edition of our quarterly journal is mainly focused on motor claims and fraud. In an ever-changing world, we have articles looking at the impact of advancing technology in vehicles but also how we are harnessing technology to provide an improved service and better outcome for you our customers. This encompasses how our risk engineering teams can work with you to best manage your risk, through enhancing our claims handling processes, to the benefits we are seeing in fraud detection. We also highlight the great work done by our rehabilitation team and give a nod to driverless cars heading this way.
We do hope that you find this journal informative and insightful and please feel free to contact any of our contributors if you would like further information.
Calum
Head of Liability Claims
FraudTechnology plays such a key part in the world of counter fraud and we are always on the lookout for new ideas and software solutions that can improve our detection rates. We know fraudsters are sophisticated and we have to be equally equipped to uncover new trends and scenarios. We are lucky at Zurich to be able to share ideas across our Global network to ensure we are pioneering new ventures which can be shared across the world.
One such new venture is our new exciting partnership with Carpe Data which brings a new proactive look at personal injury claims investigation. We are also delighted to be using automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) technology which brings a new dimension to vehicle related investigations.
As I write this we are still in lockdown but that doesn’t stop the fraud cogs from turning. We conduct interviews over the internet using secure video recording technology and our intelligence team continue to provide support through research and analysis. We are there for our customers to support them when fraudulent claims are made against them and with the advances in technology, we’ll continue to take the fight directly to them.
3Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Welcome
Making it personal
What’s more, whether you’re a broker, a customer or a delegated underwriting authority; with just a few pieces of information we’re able to create customised versions of our Property and Motor portal to provide the best experience possible. If you’re a broker or insurance manager, you can either use the portal to report claims directly or have the link to your customised portal on your website so that if one of your customers or employees fills in a claim you will automatically get a notification and copy of the claim.
As an example, this can be particularly useful to fleets where drivers can quickly and easily report claims using the portal. They can even upload photos of any damage using their mobile phones and fleet managers would automatically receive a copy of the claim.
We recognise that whilst making claims easier to report and giving customers more choice is a great step, this first notification of loss is just the start of the claims process. Whilst making the process at the start of the claim as easy as possible it needs to continue throughout the entirety of the claim. That’s why we’re continuing to work hard to increase our analytics capability and use robotics and technology to reduce manual administrative tasks which add little value to the customer journey. Over the last year, we have started to deploy numerous robots across our claims community which will enhance our claims handling efficiency and improve customer experience.
If you would benefit from a demonstration of the portal or would like to understand the options for your own version of the portal please don’t hesitate to get in touch with your Zurich contact.
Personalising the customer experience through technology: Our Motor Claims Portal
In the new age of customer personalisation, we are committed to continuously improving our claims process for our customers to make it as easy and efficient as possible, using technology to enable this. Providing our customers with the choice of self-service at their convenience, whilst driving traffic onto our online platform.
Will PaskinsHead of Claims Digital Experience
+44 (0) 7875 888819
Last year, we successfully launched our online Property portal, designed to be available 24/7 to allow customers to report their claim online. We first launched this within the Property space, and given the excellent feedback from our customers, we recently launched this for our Motor customers. Whilst we recognise it’s no replacement for those in need of urgent assistance by the side of the road, it is a quick and easy way to report motor claims without urgency and gives the customer more choice.
4Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Personalising the customer experience through technology: Our Motor Claims Portal
Driverless Cars – Where Are We Heading?
Over the last few years it seems as if the concept of driverless (fully autonomous) cars has somehow managed to spread through our society and awareness to the extent that it does not seem to be the science-fiction that we perhaps thought it was even five years ago.
Calum McPhailHead of Liability, Motor Technical & Complex Claims
+44 (0) 7734 336709
We now see component elements of driverless technology included as standard on an increasing proportion of new cars arriving on our roads, from blind-spot awareness and lane-change warnings to autonomous emergency braking (AEB). There is no doubt that motor vehicle manufacturers are developing the necessary technology at a rapidly accelerating rate and certainly faster than might have been anticipated two or three years ago.
5Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Driverless Cars – Where Are We Heading?
Cars now have a multitude of advanced technology sensors incorporated including cameras, radar and lidar (a detection system similar to radar using laser generated light). The next step is to be able to process the massive amount of associated data generated and then “instruct” the car what should happen and do so instantaneously.
We will not see an immediate change from human controlled to autonomous cars which need no driver input whatsoever – what we are seeing is the continued development of technology within vehicles which are still driven by us and acting as the “fail-safe”. To reach a stage of full autonomy the car must be able to keep itself and its occupants safe in any prevailing road conditions and situation. There will therefore be stages of development where cars are capable of certain automated activities but must be able to safely hand back control of the vehicle to the driver in certain situations.
The car will have to understand that a safe hand-back to the driver is possible so it will monitor the driver and, depending on the stage of technological development, will only allow the driver to do certain types of activity. We anticipate that initially the driver may be able to take their hands off the wheel but will still need to watch the road – be prepared for the car to tell you to pay attention!
As technology progresses and the car becomes capable of finding a safe route or safe place to park, drivers will become less involved in the control of the car. However, only when the vehicle is fully capable of dealing with any situation with no need to hand back control to a driver will we reach the stage of fully autonomous driving.
To reach that stage there needs to be development not only of the in-car technology but also of the road and transport infrastructure throughout the UK and obviously elsewhere.
The other very important aspect apart from the actual technology will be our attitude towards it and our willingness to adopt it.
As someone who quite enjoys driving, albeit now with an automatic, I do have some mixed feelings on how keen I am to be transported rather than driving myself. Whilst not a complete technology dinosaur and someone who tries to keep up to date as much as possible there is definitely a degree of wariness around trusting the car to do everything.
I have had the benefit of having a brief trial of driverless technology, and letting go of the steering wheel was not something which happened readily even with the car telling me to do so. Having said that, the car did what it was supposed to do and drove round the circuit, even negotiating changing lanes to manoeuvre around road works which had been set up. This was on a test track where the vehicle had been geo-fenced to the track layout so the car effectively “knew” where it was at any given time but it still felt very strange.
There is still a sizeable hurdle ahead to have autonomous cars ready to safely negotiate the trials and tribulations of the open UK road network, which is a different matter altogether.
There is little doubt that over the next few years we will see rapid progress in the capability of technology and inevitably we will all at some point be faced with that first “letting-go” moment – it will be interesting to see which of us jumps at the chance and who waits at the back of the queue.
Driverless Cars – Where Are We Heading? (continued)
6Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Driverless Cars – Where Are We Heading?
Zurich Motor Risk Proposition
Helen AstonTeam Leader – Workforce Strategies
+44 (0) 7734 336098
The motor fleet risk assessment is an integral part of the motor risk proposition. The assessment is an analysis of the inherent exposures faced by an organisation’s fleet operation against the policies and procedures in place to manage these risks. It also looks at how drivers, journeys, vehicles and incidents are managed. Our assessment report provides an executive summary of the key positive and negative features of the motor fleet risks and management controls, whilst also allowing customers to benchmark internally and against other Zurich fleet customers. The outcome from the assessment allows us to provide tailored solutions for customers to address the total cost of risk.
The Zurich motor risk proposition extends to offer further solutions for our customers, as highlighted below. This is the process we use to help organisations
manage their work-related road safety and is designed to ensure that you are always focused on the risks, and that you strive to achieve continuous improvement in your collision performance, working towards achieving a crash-free culture and environment.
These solutions, embedded into our proposition, seek to minimise the direct and uninsured losses, associated with every collision, whilst demonstrating a Duty of Care to our Customers.
New vehicle features and fleet industry developments bring new risks and perils. We provide insight and support to enable our customers to manage these challenges.
For more information on how to manage your motor risk, please get in touch with your usual Zurich contact.
Our risk engineering teams work hard to understand the challenges our motor fleet customers face. This includes improving the risk profile of your fleet and reducing collisions and claims, understanding your total cost of risk and where your exposures are, whilst also managing the health and safety of your employees and protecting your brand and reputation. One way they do this is through a motor fleet risk assessment.
Our Zurich motor claims team works closely with our Zurich motor risk engineering colleagues as we recognise this joint expertise creates the best outcome for our customers. So much so, the Zurich motor risk proposition is embedded within our Zurich risk engineering team, built to ensure our motor fleet customers understand and manage their risks effectively. This is an essential part of our commitment to do the right thing for our customers and make sure it works for you and your business.
7Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Zurich Motor Risk Proposition
Intelligence Led Solutions
David ClementsInvestigations Manager
+44 (0) 7875 887084
How times have changed. A plethora of big data projects subsequently opened our eyes as a Business to the value of data, intelligence; and those that can make sense of it – Intelligence Analysts. Consequently, we now possess a market leading intelligence function, with analysts working across a variety of Intelligence disciplines. These analysts are the glue that holds together many a fraud or large loss investigation, as well as helping to drive much stronger fraud detection rates. We’ve made some real strides in this area in the past decade to include investment in NetReveal and other exciting resources but we are ambitious and want to go much further.
When I joined Zurich 15 years ago, we didn’t have an intelligence team. Instead we relied on a single individual, conducting basic intelligence on a small handful of cases. He sat in the corner of a busy claims floor and no-one really understood what he did or why.
8Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Intelligence Led Solutions
Intelligence Led Solutions (continued)
In the fraud arena, we talk about our aspiration to take an intelligence-led approach to investigation. This isn’t rocket science – the idea being you want to know as much about a fraudulent claimant and their associates as possible from day one. That affords you the best opportunity to deploy the right tactics and achieve the best result. A large part of an analyst’s role is to profile people and firms of concern. In fact, last year the team profiled over 2,000 claimants whose claims were worth in excess of £85m. But this traditional approach to profiling is, by its nature, reactive – in that we await a concern being identified before starting to investigate.
But imagine if you could use an automated solution to screen personal injury claims at inception to establish whether the claimant’s online profile was consistent with their alleged injury? Through partnership with Carpe Data, Zurich have now turned this concept into a reality and have recently commenced the second phase of an 18-month pilot.
Carpe Data’s algorithms take a holistic view of the vast array of public open source data available to web users. Once the technology has worked its magic, Zurich receive a report into any claimant of concern. Our Intelligence Team will then review, using a variety of other tools and resources to build the picture further and recommend any action to be taken. In many cases this recommendation will be to investigate and repudiate the claim.
The Carpe Data solution has generated some truly exciting results already. Take for example, the footballer, whose claim looked entirely genuine until Carpe Data identified that his performances on the pitch were at loggerheads to his injury claim. Or the individual pursuing two EL claims until Carpe Data proactively detected he had competed in two Polish marathons between the accident dates in question. Or the convicted money launderer, whose past convictions and criminal background cast doubt on the veracity of his claim. The examples are numerous but they all share something one thing common – this solution took us straight to the conflicting information.
The solution has also generated additional benefits. Some referrals don’t evidence fraud but provide our claims handlers with useful information to either facilitate a better settlement or to validate a claim entirely. In such circumstances, we expect benefits from more accurate reserving and faster settlement.
Whilst we’re talking innovation in the fraud space, it would be wrong not to reference the exciting work we’re doing in the credit hire arena. We’ve teamed up with The Cotswold Group to cross-check all credit hire claims against their ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) database and we’re now live.
ANPR technology is often present at entry/exit barriers operating in car parks. ANPR cameras are able to capture information, including VRNs, time stamps and digital images, whenever a vehicle passes. The Cotswold Group have secured an exclusive licence to use this commercial data sourced from a UK-wide network of petrol forecourts, supermarkets, fast food outlets and other areas. All in line with data protection regulations.
If a third party continues to drive their own vehicle whilst simultaneously being in hire, we will now know about it and will get a detailed report with time stamps and photos. Early use suggests we’ll be able to spot both organised frauds and exaggerated hire claims as a result. Where suspicious patterns of vehicle hire are detected a report will be generated and provided to Zurich for onward investigation.
In a world where the fraud threat faced by our commercial customers is ever evolving and claims need to be paid faster than ever, it’s essential that innovation continues to sit at the heart of our UK fraud strategy. This means that we can support our genuine customers claims quicker and to an even higher standard.
9Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Intelligence Led Solutions
Fraud on the dancefloor
Background
The Plaintiff attended a friend’s birthday celebration at our Insured’s Nightclub bar premises on the 31st May 2013. Whilst dancing on the dance floor she allegedly slipped on a wet floor. According to the Plaintiff, she had only had 2 drinks pre-accident (a liqueur and a cocktail), and was not intoxicated. She also alleged that she was only wearing platform shoes at the time. A statement from her friend, suggested the Plaintiff had slipped previously on the dance floor and that the she witnessed both falls, and that the Plaintiff slipped rather than tripped. The Plaintiff alleged that her skirt was wet and, although the friend’s original statement did not mention that, when giving evidence in Court, she stated that she did note that the Plaintiff’s skirt was wet.
Digging further into the evidence
It was found that the Plaintiff’s medical records, however, highlighted that the Plaintiff only reported that she fell due to “jiving in high heels”. The CCTV footage suggested that the Plaintiff was unsteady on her feet prior to the accident, was dancing vigorously as the accident occurred, and was wearing 6 inch stiletto heel shoes. The CCTV footage confirmed that the Insured did permit patrons to dance when carrying drinks, and the inspection records showed that there were a high level of spills dealt with each evening. There was a concern that a systems defence would therefore fail, but the weight of the evidence did suggest that the Plaintiff had stumbled rather than slipped, and a decision was taken to contest this matter, which proceeded before the judge on the 13th January and 21st January 2020, to determine causation issues.
The Law
Clearly if the Court determined that the fall occurred due to a slip, a successful defence would turn on the assessment of the system operated to keep the floor clear, clean and safe. The main case in this area is still a decision in Ward v Tesco Stores (1976). The Northern Ireland decision, in the case of Stennett v Dunnes Stores (Bangor) Ltd, also assessed suitable systems, and in that case, the judge held that a “clean as you go” policy was not adequate and required documentary evidence. Counsel’s view was therefore that the informal nature of our Insured’s system did leave it ripe for criticism.
The main basis of contesting the case was that the CCTV footage tended to support a stumble, rather than a slip, and there was no reference to a slip in the
We’re pleased to share a recent fraud success from a claim involving a nightclub fall incident, where the plaintiff’s ‘unconvincing’ evidence was rejected in court as she was ‘less than forthcoming’ about what she had to drink, her footwear, as well as exaggerating her disability, and the recovery she had made. It was therefore concluded that the Judge was not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities that the Plaintiff slipped and fell and the claim was dismissed.
10Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Fraud on the dancefloor
Fraud on the dancefloor (continued)
medical records. Furthermore, the Plaintiff maintained she was significantly disabled, continuing to use a crutch some 5 years post-accident, and the images on social media suggested that was not the case.
Counsel did review the case in light of the decision in Summer v Fairclough Homes, and the local decision of Cooper v Byford and another. Counsel’s view was that it was unlikely that, in this case, the Judge would believe there was sufficient evidence of exaggeration to render the claim forfeit in its entirety, should the Judge decide that the Plaintiff did slip as alleged. It remained Counsel’s view that it was more likely that the Judge would reject the claim outright, on the basis that the Plaintiff simply “went over on her ankle” due to high heels, possible intoxication and her vigorous dance style. Counsel did open to the Judge, in the alternative, should he find against us on primary liability, that he would address the Court on the Summer v Fairclough Homes point.
Ultimately, the Judge rejected the Plaintiff’s claim on the basis that he did not find her evidence credible and that the accident occurred because she inverted her ankle and that there was no evidence of a slip. He therefore did not need to address in detail issues pursuant to Ward v Tesco Stores or Summer v Fairclough Homes.
In relation to the value of the claim, if the Plaintiff’s medical evidence was accepted, the general damages had a potential of up to £70,000.00. The Defendant argued, however, that if the Court accepted the Defence medical evidence, namely that the Plaintiff was significantly exaggerating the ongoing sequel of this incident, the claim had a value no greater than £40,000.00.
Outcome
In giving Judgment, the Judge initially commenced by an approach to valuation of the case and confirmed he preferred the Defence medical evidence, and was of the view that the Plaintiff had been “less than frank in her presentation”. He confirmed that he would value the claim, therefore, at £40,000.00. The Judge then turned to the issue of how the Plaintiff sustained her injury, and expressed dissatisfaction with her witness evidence. In particular, he noted that, despite the Plaintiff being in the company of many friends, she only brought the one witness to support her case. The judge stated that this witness was not able to provide convincing evidence. He stated that the Plaintiff, herself, was an “unconvincing witness”. He noted she had not been forthcoming about what she had to drink that night, and that the hospital history stated “alcohol on board”.
The Judge said he thought it was unlikely the doctor would have referred to this if he did not think alcohol played a part in the accident. He noted the reference to “jiving with heels” and noted that the Plaintiff had substantial 5-6 inch stiletto heels on. Despite the Plaintiff making the case that her skirt was wet, the Judge noted that she had been dancing for 2 ½ hours, which would cause anyone to perspire, and noted that there was nothing in the contemporaneous notes about a slip.
The Judge stated that, taking into account all the evidence, and having had the opportunity to watch the Plaintiff give her evidence, he had difficulty in accepting her testimony. The Judge then stated the Plaintiff was “less than forthcoming” about what she had to drink, her footwear, and that she had exaggerated her disability, and the recovery she had made. The Judge concluded that he preferred the evidence of the Defendant’s Engineer, and that the CCTV did appear to the Judge to show that the Plaintiff fell due to her footwear, energetic jiving and what she had to drink.
It was therefore concluded that the Judge was not satisfied, on the balance of probabilities that the Plaintiff slipped and fell. He dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim.
Commentary
This is a very pleasing decision, where a High Court Judge has rejected the evidence of the Plaintiff and her witness, and found it to be unconvincing to the extent that he did not accept her testimony, and furthermore the Judge held that there was exaggeration of the Plaintiff’s disability and the recovery which she had made, particularly taking into account the social media images. The case demonstrates the benefit of intelligence evidence and a robust approach to dubious claims.
11Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Fraud on the dancefloor
Motor Fraud Case Study
The Claim
It was alleged that the claimant, driving a car, was in collision with our insured’s vehicle; a moped after it changed lanes in slow moving traffic. This relatively minor incident allegedly caused damage to the claimant’s vehicle as well as their passenger suffering whiplash type injuries. The claimant made it clear on several occasions however that they did not suffer any injury in the alleged impact.
Following receipt of the accident report from our insured admitting fault, liability was accepted, and the photos of the damaged vehicle were reviewed by our in-house engineers. It was agreed that at face value, the damage suffered to the third party vehicle was consistent with the circumstances advised and payment of almost £4000 was made to the claimant.
At Zurich we are committed to protecting our customers, particularly around the industry challenge of Fraud. We strongly believe in embedding fraud detection within all areas of claims handling, providing staff with the knowledge and tools to ensure that all suspicious activity is properly and thoroughly investigated. A recent example within Motor looks at a fraudulent case seen by one of our Commercial customers, relating to a motor accident that occurred between the third party claimant and our insured’s delivery driver.
12Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Motor Fraud Case Study
Several months later however, we received a notification that the claimant was now intending on claiming for injury following this accident, advising that after hitting the moped they had also suffered whiplash injuries. This was in addition to their passenger, who also sent through their claim for whiplash. Despite our insured’s delivery driver being on a moped they were completely uninjured, however.
Having previously been advised that the driver had suffered no injury, and given the very mild nature of this accident in general, both injury cases were declined.
We were awaiting a response to this denial, when we were contacted by IFED (The Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department; a branch of the MET police). It turns out that they had been investigating the claimant for other fraud matters and had identified the claim that we were dealing with.
Digging further into the evidence
As a result, the claim was pulled from normal handling into our Fraud Ring team, specifically skilled in dealing with cases where fraud is suspected. The claim was investigated in greater detail, where issues were discovered with the photos of the vehicle damage the claimant provided. When reviewed, it was established via the photographic properties that these had actually been taken some 45 days before the date of the alleged accident, making it clear that the alleged damage to the vehicle was not caused by this incident.
As a result of this, an expert report was sought confirming the findings in order to support a charge against the claimant for fraud by false misrepresentation. This information was passed to IFED in order to bring them to justice, where the claimant was promptly arrested.
The claim goes to court
Following the charge, the claimant did not make life easy for himself! Firstly, they did not attend their trial meaning a Bench Warrant was issued, before handing themselves in and pleading guilty. Then at the sentencing hearing, the claimant sacked their solicitor and tried to retract their Guilty Plea! An unprecedented move by all accounts.
A month later, the claimant was back in court, where the judge found them guilty by default. They received an eight month jail sentence as well as additional time for the other fraud offences the claimant was accused of. Overall, a great result for Zurich and our customer.
Whilst this claim was not the most high value case, it emphasises Zurich’s strong approach in protecting our customers from fraudsters and those willing to cheat the system. In this instance, the claimant provided false evidence as well as exaggerating the effects of the accident for financial gain. Pursuing the conviction sends a strong message that fraud in all its guises should not be tolerated.
Motor Fraud Case Study (continued)
13Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Motor Fraud Case Study
Innovations in the motor claim journey
Operational Excellence
We are now using technology hand in hand with our expert knowledge of UK road traffic liability, including legislation, regulations and case law. Information relating to relevant case law is provided via online digital case law digest, updated daily, alongside excerpts from the Highway Code.
Accessed via a secure standalone portal, claims handlers answer a set of key questions about the incident including the use of dynamic visual aids relating to the accident scenario. Once the system has all these answers it analyses them to deliver immediate guidance on liability. Links to Google Maps and historical meteorological data help pinpoint the accident’s exact location and weather conditions at the time. This enables the claims handler to produce a concise locus report in seconds, alongside the liability outcome, with no additional costs incurred.
Improved efficiency
The system has been adapted to operate alongside our existing systems and ensure that its data collection and analysis process fits seamlessly into our existing First Notification of Loss (FNOL) and claims handling processes.
By answering a very limited number of dynamic questions posed by the system, claims handlers can direct claims into the correct team much more quickly than before, reducing operational expense and indemnity spend, while increasing customer satisfaction, as claims are resolved more quickly.
We have very quickly reduced the unnecessary demand on our liability disputes area leaving more time to focus on more complex and disputed events and, in turn, have significantly reduced our claims lifecycles contributing to a reduction in claims spend.
Robert McWilliams Repair Relationship Manager
+44 (0) 7875 888480
Graeme MushetHead of Motor Operations & Claims Administration
+44 (0) 7875 887345
Every year, UK motor insurers handle in excess of 500,000 motor accident claims on behalf of their policyholders. Deciding who is responsible is essential in each case and assessing liability routinely involves a time-intensive process which can raise challenges where the third party needs to hire an alternative replacement vehicle, at increased cost to insurers.
14Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Innovations in the motor claim journey
Total Loss Assessment
As part of our aim at Zurich to make the claims process as easy as possible for our customers, our motor claims team currently utilise a tool which assists from a reserving perspective as well as providing a reliable early identification of total losses.
Through the implementation of this new technology, we are able to better predict if a vehicle is a total loss earlier in the claims process. Running the damage description, age, mileage and other data through an analytical model gives us a confident indication of whether a vehicle is going to be a total loss.
When a motor claim is received from a customer, this technology allows our claims handlers to select the area of the vehicle that has been damaged and requests the handler to then select if the damage on the vehicle is light, moderate or heavy. This generates a cost to repair the vehicle which can then be used for setting the reserve on the claim. The tool also allows the pre-accident valuation of the vehicle to be confirmed, and after comparing the repair cost to the vehicle valuation, makes the decision if the vehicle is repairable or a total loss.
Once the decision has been made to either repair or total loss, the claim handler can either send the vehicle directly to the salvage agent or into our Zurich approved repairer network. This means less costs and time at the repair garage for assessment and quicker claim resolution.
Speeding up the claims process: Our virtual motor engineering solution
We have also implemented further new technology which we hope will further improve the claims journey and experience for our motor customers. If one of our customers submits an accident claim this new tool gives the option for our claims handlers to send out a link directly to the customer, enabling them to quickly and efficiently upload images of the vehicle damage. Within a few moments, our claims handlers are able to assess, validate and determine whether the vehicle is repairable or deemed a total loss.
If it is decided that repair via our Zurich authorised network of repairers is the most suitable option, they can be appointed at a time most convenient to the customer. This provides customers with personalisation and choice, whilst also reducing claims cycle times. Not only quicker and easier, but by utilising our repair network, customers are receiving the benefits of work guarantee.
The tool operates as an application which opens and orientates on any device (mobile or otherwise), allowing easy access for customers.
The process map below, details the customer journey, using the new integrated application.
A customer is involved in a road traffic accident and notifies us of their claim. Claims handler sends customer link to the Zurich application, to upload images
of their vehicle.
Customer uploads images of their vehicle, including a complete vehicle view, as well as the specific damages. We also ask a few simple questions
to validate the pre-accident value.
Once the images are uploaded to the application, these are viewed and assessed. An estimate is compiled to repair the vehicle and provides the customer with
a final decision, from one of the following options:
The repair is steered into our Authorised Repairer Network
The vehicle is confirmed as a
total loss
Cash settlement to the customer
If the above process is followed, the claim will have been notified to us, dealt with, and the claim is paid out over a matter of days. This also negates the requirement for our customers to make unnecessary/unwanted visits to bodyshops or dealers.
The implementation of this new technology within our motor claims process, will remove the requirement for our customers to make unnecessary or unwanted visits to body shops or dealers and ultimately will improve the overall claim experience for all our motor customers.
Innovations in the motor claim journey (continued)
15Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Innovations in the motor claim journey
Flexibility in a changing world
New processes
As a result of the current lockdown, many body shops in the motor repair market have closed down. Whilst the number of repair notifications now being received has also significantly reduced, there are still customers making claims regarding damaged vehicles.
Thanks to the new technology implemented within our motor team, we have been able to continue to provide services to such customers to ensure we can appropriately prioritise repairs, identify key workers and
provide customers with the best outcome remotely during the COVID-19 UK lockdown. As discussed earlier in the journal, the ‘virtual motor engineering’ solution allows customers to send in photos and/or videos of their vehicle damage to a motor engineer, who can assess the damage remotely. At this point, we can offer our customers options. We can try and deploy the vehicle to a repairer who is open. Alternatively, we can offer a cash settlement. Total loss claims can also be dealt with this way.
We are pleased to be able to help and have received some positive feedback from both customers and brokers alike because of the options we are providing, especially to key workers, at this challenging time.
Helping where we can
Our customer is an NHS employee. Their vehicle was in for repair, however as the situation changed the garage had closed and to complicate matters more the parts needed to complete the repair were also unavailable due to factory closures. Although our customer had a courtesy vehicle provided, this is not fit for purpose for the longer term. To try and help we agreed to take replace the customer’s hire car with something more appropriate as soon as possible.
Our new technology in action
A road traffic accident claim was reported to us on 14th April, involving our customer, an NHS keyworker who suffered vehicle damage in the hospital car park. By leveraging our new claim technology, we were able to send out all the necessary claims application information on the same day as the incident. The following day, our customer could then directly uploaded images of their vehicle damage. The claim was then reviewed, an estimate compiled and the customer was contacted with an update.
Knowing how important it is to have our keyworkers fully mobile we then appointed the body shop, who ordered the necessary parts for repairs before the vehicle even arrived on their site. The body shop continued to impress and collected the vehicle within three hours of notification. Thanks to our systems and partnership with the body shop we are proud that within the space of three days, the customer’s repaired car was returned to them at the hospital where they work.
16Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > Flexibility in a changing world
In Focus: Our Rehabilitation Team
Leon MarshCase Management Senior Nurse
+44 (0) 121 697 8751
Road traffic collisions were responsible for 157,630 casualties of all severities in 2019. The Department of Transport estimates the costs of all traffic incidents to be £36 billion per annum. According to the office for national statistics, the average UK wage is £28,080, meaning the costs to our customers every week an employee is absent is an average of £585 in salary, in addition to the loss of production time and temporary staffing costs. The Medical Management Centre (MMC) within Zurich understands the financial impact of such incidents and aims to mitigate losses to our customers. When a worker is injured during their normal working day, the MMC is able to facilitate the rehabilitation process when access to treatment is restricted or delayed via the NHS.
17Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > In Focus: Our Rehabilitation Team
In Focus: Our Rehabilitation Team (continued)
When road traffic accidents occur, treatment can be provided by a third-party insurer however this can often become delayed whilst liability is being admitted. In some cases, such as hit and runs, a third-party insurer may not be available. Zurich customers have access to a team of in-house Rehabilitation Case Managers (RCM) who are healthcare professionals and able support the employees immediately following an incident, right through to recovery.
An appropriate triage during the acute phase of injury (0-5 days) is critical to recovery. Reassurance and simply explaining to individuals how to prevent and control the initial symptoms can be as important as hands-on treatment.
Zurich’s team of rehabilitation case managers will assess employees telephonically using a specific bio-psychosocial questioning model to gather information on injuries, symptoms and needs. The model not only focuses on physical implication but also psychological and social-environmental factors. This ensures that the appropriate level of intervention is provided at the right time whilst considering influencing factors such as gender, beliefs, expectations and social support.
The Chartered Society of Physiotherapists state that with exercise general neck pain should ease within two weeks and recover within four to six weeks. Exercises should also be used for six to eight weeks. Whiplash injuries sustained during road traffic accidents may be more significant and also involve the shoulders and back and should therefore be anticipated that more treatment may be required.
Should the RCM need to arrange treatment this will be provided by our panel treatment providers at fixed costs. This means that if an employee required ten physiotherapy treatment sessions it would cost the same as four. Our agreed panel fees are central to the MMC’s commitment to mitigate claims costs. This allows Zurich to reduce and better control costs whilst deterring fraudulent claimants who believe more treatment will generate higher settlement figures.
All case management from the MMC is done with the employees consent to share all relevant recovery information with other medical professional and their employer. This means our customer is kept updated throughout the recovery process. Often employees may be able to return to work however, initially in a reduced capacity, whilst there are some who may be fearful of returning to work. In collaboration with the customer our RCM’s can co-ordinate graduated return to work plans to ensure employees can make an appropriate and sustainable return to work. The services of Zurich’s Medical Management Centre is at no additional cost to our insured customer and is viewed as a pro-active response to reducing costs.
18Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal > In Focus: Our Rehabilitation Team
Zurich Insurance plc is authorised by the Central Bank of Ireland and authorised and subject to limited regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority. Details about the extent of our authorisation by the Financial Conduct Authority are available from us on request.
Our FCA Firm Reference Number is 203093.
NP720299010 (05/20) CMS
19Zurich Claims Quarterly Journal
