You’re right. I read the article and it is a highly demagogic discourse. The tone taken make it sounds like there is plenty of redflags but from my point of view, the risks that are raised are exactly the same with an agent. I read your post before reading the article so i was aware of your message about giving a direction to the message, an agenda. Here you go : (basically the sentence says : !! Be careful !! but let’s start with car insurance. No prob.
“…nous croyons qu’il pourrait être envisageable d’ouvrir la porte à la DPAL sans l’intervention d’un représentant, mais seulement dans le cas de certains produits, ceux de l’assurance automobile.”
I am of two mind about the report. First it is important to note I’ve only analyzed it from the life insurance perspective. i don’t know enough about general insurance to provide a good critic. On the life side, the report provide a legal point of view of selling life insurance directly to the consumer. Now since this legal point of view was written by lawyers, it’s well researched. The point of view from Options Consommateurs is that the law clearly states that any insurance sold in Quebec (unless it is attached to a underlying product such as credit or mortgage) can only be sold through physical licensed representatives.
Here is where the report does not make sense. The report states clearly in writing that it is currently impossible to conlude a contract of life insurance over the internet. This is so wrong, I can’t see this as an error. It can only be a lie. Just go on Manulife web site for Coverme and you can buy insurance directly from Manulife without ever talking to an agent. this has been on Tv. You can’t watch history channel without seeing an add…
So why is Options Consommateur trying to mislead the legislator in trying to convince them that insurance sales over the internet is not a reality and that it is only a possibility? Why? Is it to protect the AMF? because if sales over the internet was illegal, why has the AMF not intervene to stop Manulife?
This report was presented first to La chambre financiere. Did La chambre financiere contributed financially for the production of this report. There is a lot of questions. Sadly no medias are asking questions on this when this a is matter of great public interest. I will deal with this in January…
The Insurance Specialist 
You’re right. I read the article and it is a highly demagogic discourse. The tone taken make it sounds like there is plenty of redflags but from my point of view, the risks that are raised are exactly the same with an agent. I read your post before reading the article so i was aware of your message about giving a direction to the message, an agenda. Here you go : (basically the sentence says : !! Be careful !! but let’s start with car insurance. No prob.
“…nous croyons qu’il pourrait être envisageable d’ouvrir la porte à la DPAL sans l’intervention d’un représentant, mais seulement dans le cas de certains produits, ceux de l’assurance automobile.”
I am of two mind about the report. First it is important to note I’ve only analyzed it from the life insurance perspective. i don’t know enough about general insurance to provide a good critic. On the life side, the report provide a legal point of view of selling life insurance directly to the consumer. Now since this legal point of view was written by lawyers, it’s well researched. The point of view from Options Consommateurs is that the law clearly states that any insurance sold in Quebec (unless it is attached to a underlying product such as credit or mortgage) can only be sold through physical licensed representatives.
Here is where the report does not make sense. The report states clearly in writing that it is currently impossible to conlude a contract of life insurance over the internet. This is so wrong, I can’t see this as an error. It can only be a lie. Just go on Manulife web site for Coverme and you can buy insurance directly from Manulife without ever talking to an agent. this has been on Tv. You can’t watch history channel without seeing an add…
So why is Options Consommateur trying to mislead the legislator in trying to convince them that insurance sales over the internet is not a reality and that it is only a possibility? Why? Is it to protect the AMF? because if sales over the internet was illegal, why has the AMF not intervene to stop Manulife?
This report was presented first to La chambre financiere. Did La chambre financiere contributed financially for the production of this report. There is a lot of questions. Sadly no medias are asking questions on this when this a is matter of great public interest. I will deal with this in January…