A car-insurance premium increase is a conduct and trust risk when the customer cannot see what changed, test whether the price is fair or find a practical way to reduce it.
The 30-second take
Insurers should treat renewal transparency as a customer value control, not a disclosure or compliance exercise.
Each material increase should connect to understandable reasons, relevant payment choices and a controlled review pathway. This applies to any product or service – people just want to understand the “why” and feel they are valued by your organisation.
The board-level test is not whether an actuarial model can justify the portfolio result. It is whether the organisation can communicate and explain individual outcomes, detect groups receiving poor outcomes and act before complaints become the main source of insight.
ASIC’s 2026 review exposed the value of asking
ASIC’s Report 838, published on 11 August 2026, examined how motor-vehicle insurers disclose premiums at purchase and renewal and included a consumer survey conducted in January 2026.
ASIC reported that 31% of consumers who contacted their insurer before renewing obtained a lower premium without changing their cover. It also found consumers were often given vague explanations for increases and that some annual-payment savings were not made clear.
The result is operationally important: access to information and negotiation changed customer outcomes.
If a lower price is available after contact, management should know which customers receive it, what discretion staff exercise and whether less confident customers are disadvantaged by not asking. That is a distribution and fairness question, not merely a communications question.
AFCA shows where friction becomes visible
AFCA’s 2024–25 general-insurance review recorded 34,231 complaints, a 17% increase from the prior year. Its overall complaints review says comprehensive vehicle insurance remained the most complained-about insurance product.
Complaint volumes do not prove that every premium outcome is wrong. They show why renewal, pricing and complaint data must be analysed together. A rise in price-related contact, cancellation, non-renewal or hardship should reach product and pricing owners quickly enough to challenge the model, the communication or both.
Useful board reporting therefore goes beyond average premium movement. It shows which cohorts experienced the largest changes, how often prices fell after contact, whether channels produced different outcomes and whether complaint themes align with pricing assumptions.
Renewal promises need end-to-end traceability
Pricing transparency fails when a notice, discount promise or prior-premium comparison cannot be reconciled to the policy record. The control should connect what the customer was told, what the pricing engine calculated and what the administration system charged.
Assurance should test whether the stated reason for an increase matches the customer’s actual record. Monitoring should combine premium-change distributions, discounts, staff overrides, contacts, cancellations, complaints and remediation. Exceptions need a named owner before customers discover them.
Clearer notices are necessary, but they are not sufficient. Customers also need a workable route to query the outcome, and the organisation needs evidence that comparable customers are treated consistently when they do.
Questions for your pricing and conduct controls
- Can you explain each material renewal increase using reasons that match the customer’s actual pricing record?
- Do renewal communications clearly show relevant payment savings, discounts and review options?
- Can management see which customer cohorts receive lower prices only after contacting the insurer?
- Are advertised benefits reconciled against the amounts applied in policy administration systems?
- Do complaints, cancellations and hardship indicators trigger timely challenge of both the model and the communication?
Test the outcome, not just the notice
If assurance stops after confirming that a renewal notice was sent, it is not testing whether the customer could understand or challenge the outcome. Visit the Innovation of Risk to examine practical conduct controls and take a readiness snapshot.