GPs providing full patient medical records to insurers risk breaking data protection laws, the Information Commissioner Office (ICO) has warned. Cover looks at this industry practice in greater depth
Insurer views
Legal & General is one such company that has used SARs in a bid to speed up the process.
A statement from Legal & General Insurance said: "Our view is that the appropriate and relevant use of SARs is of significant benefit to customers.
"A SAR genuinely protects their interests by ensuring that we have relevant health information to assess their application. It minimises the risk of unintentional misrepresentation and therefore enables customers to have peace of mind that new medical information will not need to be considered if they have to claim in the future.
"Naturally, we welcome further discussions with the ICO on the important topic of SARs.
"Pending the outcome of those discussions and any other developments that are relevant to this debate we will continue with our current practice of using a SAR to request medical evidence, where it is needed, for new applications and those applications in the pipeline.
"However, if a GP surgery or a customer tell us that they do not want a SAR to be used to underwrite an application, we will revert to requesting a GPR."
Meanwhile, Aviva has clarified its position to COVER and has said pending the review, it will not use SARs in the meantime.
In a statement, the insurer said: "Aviva treats the management of its customers' personal details very seriously. The majority of Aviva's protection applications are accepted without the need for medical evidence from a GP, and only in a small number of cases are GPs required to provide information so that we can process applications as quickly as possible for our customers.
"We are aware that the ICO has conducted a general review of the use of SARs. Pending further assessment of the ICO's review, we have decided not to continue offering SARs at the current time.
"We have always sought to act in the best interests of our customers. We will now look to work with the ICO, ABI and BMA to ensure a satisfactory outcome for all stakeholders. "
A spokesperson for the ABI said that none of its members currently use SARs: "The ABI sought a view over a year ago on the use of SARs as part of the ICO's review into this practice and has received a letter outlining the Commission Office's position.
"Some insurers have previously given the option to customers of using a SAR, with clear consent, to improve the efficiency of the application process, as well as the underwriting for some life insurance products.
"No ABI members are currently offering SARs to request medical information. We will be working with our members and the ICO to address the issues raised, with a view to enabling consumers to get insurance as quickly as possible."
New solutions?
Detractors say that the method of using SARs has not been effective in terms of cost or time management, with little difference in turnaround time compared with GPRs.
Others in the protection industry believe that using any GP reports in the underwriting process will always be ineffective, and that the industry should move to other solutions.
Phil Jeynes, sales and marketing director of UnderwriteMe, said: "The principle of insurers using SARs to speed up the information gathering process is quite sound, but I've always believed the avoidance of requests for further information is the only true solution to the problem of getting medical details for a client.
"SARs were never designed for the purpose of satisfying insurers' underwriting needs and it's no surprise that, as more insurers use this loophole, the extra workload for the medical profession has become an issue.
"We need to look at modern, smart ways to gather and disseminate information, not try to work around an existing problem by creating another. It's time for the industry to embrace real change and catch up with the digital age."
