The Scoop: Ratings for Insurers - Check24 Stands Tall in Court Battle
- *
ECJ Reinforces Check24's Position in Insurance Sector - Ensuring the Execution of Proposed Measures: The Commission has taken various actions to guarantee the realization of these proposals.
Insurance, cruises, funerals - comparison portals have got you covered with a wealth of product and service information. These sites aim to offer a quick, user-friendly review of options, even when it comes to complex topics like insurance. But is it right for them to grade these insurers?
The initial court ruling has sided with Check24, but the battle isn't over yet. The case has been sent back to the Munich I Regional Court for further consideration.
Navigating intricate insurance policies, made simple with ratings
The controversial rating system grades different insurers from 1.0 to 4.0, serving as a guide for consumers navigating the labyrinth of policies. However, HUK-Coburg insurance contends that this type of evaluation constitutes inappropriate comparative advertising, and filed a lawsuit against Check24 seeking an injunction and damages.
HUK-Coburg contends that insurance is too complex to be summarized by a single grade, considering it to be a purely subjective judgment. If the regional court in Munich concludes that such comparisons are permissible when presented as ratings or points, the ruling could have far-reaching implications for the entire industry.
Doubts cast by the judges
The question now centers on whether Check24's offer qualifies as "comparative advertising" under EU law, the ECJ judges ruled. This can only be the case if Check24 and HUK-Coburg are considered direct competitors, vying for the same customers.
The Luxembourg judges expressed some reserve, highlighting that HUK-Coburg provides insurance while Check24 serves merely as a comparison and mediation platform for insurance providers.
Neither HUK-Coburg nor Check24 offered comments on the court case.
Consumer groups: Comparison portals are biased
Comparison portals have substantial market influence; omitting a company from their list gives that company a disadvantage. In the insurance sector, they act as brokers, with Check24 confirming that it usually receives a commission when insurers secure policies via their portal.
Sandra Klug, insurance expert at the Hamburg Consumer Center, advises consumers not to trust that a comparison portal covers the entire market. "Comparison portals fail to deliver a comprehensive, impartial overview."
This is not the first legal dispute of this nature. Klug points out that portals suggest that policy conclusion is a straightforward process. Consumers feel well-informed, but may require additional advice, as complex insurance policies harbor significant risks.
An earlier court case found that Check24 checked less than half the market for private liability insurance, focusing only on tariffs from 38 of 89 relevant insurers. According to the consumer center, these were exclusively companies willing to pay a commission for policy acquisition.
- Comparison Platform
- ECJ
- Check24
- HUK-Coburg
- Fair Competition
- Consumer Protection
- Financial Services
- Regulatory Frameworks
- Comparative Advertising
- EU Law
Additional Info
Under EU law, comparison portals like Check24 can assign ratings to insurers, but their permissibility largely depends on the specific regulatory frameworks and how the ratings are generated and presented. Comparative advertising is governed primarily by the Directive 2006/114/EC on misleading and comparative advertising, prohibiting misleading and disparaging practices aimed at competitors [1]. If generated objectively, transparently, and based on verifiable criteria, the ratings do not necessarily breach EU rules [2].
Should the ratings involve discredit, misleading statements, or conflicts of interest, they would be deemed impermissible under EU comparative advertising regulations [2]. To prevent misleading practices, it's crucial to disclose the rating methodology to consumers to support informed purchasing decisions [2].
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) emphasizes the need for integrity, transparency, and independence in rating activities within financial services, further stressing the importance of maintaining trust in rating systems [3]. Under EU rules, rating portals must act responsibly and without conflicts of interest [2].
[1] European Commission. (n.d.). Comparative advertising. eur-lex.europa.eu
[2] European Commission. (2007, November). Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the rules for comparative advertising and for the coordination of certain provisions laying down penalties for misleading or comparative advertising. europa.eu[3] ESMA. (n.d.). International cooperation and supervisory convergence of credit rating agencies. esma.europa.eu
- The regulatory frameworks surrounding comparative advertising, such as Directive 2006/114/EC, primarily govern the practices of comparison portals like Check24.
- In the insurance sector, concerns about conflicts of interest and potential misleading practices in rating systems, like those used by Check24, have prompted calls for transparency and integrity, particularly in accordance with EU laws and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) guidelines.
