No Surprises
Consumer Support + Consumer Understanding
Most insurance firms provide technically compliant disclosure. Exclusions appear in the policy wording, key facts documents exist, terms are legally accurate. But customers regularly discover what their policy does not cover at the worst possible moment: when they make a claim. The FCA cited this as a systemic failure across the market. It is not a documentation problem — it is a journey design problem. The information existed; the journey did not surface it when it could have changed a decision.
The structural move is to redesign when and where material limitations appear in the customer journey — making the most consequential information visible before commitment, not discoverable after it:
At purchaseExclusions and key limitations are visible at the point of comparison and quote, not only in policy wording delivered post-sale. The customer should not reach the point of payment without having encountered the most consequential things the product will not do. The design test: could a customer buying this product identify the three things most likely to cause a declined claim?
At renewalProactive communication of any coverage changes, new exclusions, or conditions that have shifted since the previous term. Not a like-for-like renewal notice that assumes nothing has changed. The design test: does the renewal communication surface every change that could produce a different outcome from the one the customer experienced last year?
At claimsThe first contact experience sets accurate expectations immediately, with clear explanation of why a claim may not be covered and what options exist — before a formal decision is issued. The design test: does the customer understand the likely outcome and the reasoning before receiving an official letter?
Claims disputes citing lack of coverage awareness decline measurably over time, tracked as a specific complaint category
Customer comprehension testing shows exclusion awareness above a defined threshold before purchase completes
Complaint themes shift away from coverage misunderstanding toward substantive product dissatisfaction
Renewal uptake holds or improves despite more prominent limitation disclosure — evidence that transparency builds trust rather than deterring purchase
A home insurer analysed its claims complaints and found that 34% cited lack of awareness of a specific exclusion — accidental damage not being included in the standard policy. The exclusion was on page 14 of the policy booklet. They restructured the online purchase journey to present the three most consequential exclusions as a confirmation step before payment, requiring the customer to acknowledge each one. Claims complaints citing coverage unawareness fell by 41% within two quarters. The policy wording had not changed. The journey had.
A travel insurer discovered that 60% of declined claims for pre-existing medical conditions involved customers who had declared their condition at purchase but had not understood that it was excluded from cover. The declaration question was designed to collect data, not to communicate consequences. They redesigned the declaration flow so that each medical condition entered triggered an immediate, plain-English explanation of what would and would not be covered. Disputes about pre-existing condition exclusions dropped by half. The information had always been available; the journey now surfaced it at the moment it mattered.
- Common failure modes
The most common failure mode is treating this as a content problem rather than a journey problem — rewriting exclusion language in plainer English without changing when and where it appears. A second is designing the journey for the average customer and treating vulnerable or low-literacy customers as edge cases, inverting the correct design logic. A third is adding disclosure touchpoints that create information overload: the goal is not more information but better-placed information. If the customer sees twelve warnings, they read none.