Claims still define insurance value, say Carpenters Group leaders

Claims is the moment of truth

Insurance can talk about pricing, distribution, AI, and growth all day long, but claims is where the promise lands or collapses. That is the point Carpenters Group chief executive Donna Richards and claims strategy director Simon Smith were driving at when they spoke at BIBA 2026 in Manchester Central: customers do not judge insurance by the brochure, they judge it by what happens when something goes wrong.

That is why claims technology matters so much to P&C software buyers. A fast workflow is useful, but speed alone does not earn trust if the process feels fragmented, opaque, or cold. The real test is whether the claim still feels coordinated and humane when a customer is stressed, confused, and waiting for an answer.

Why the claims story keeps coming back

Carpenters Group matters in this conversation because it sits close to the operational edge of the journey. The company is described as the largest outsourced motor claims handling provider working with insurers and brokers across the UK, which means it sees the point where insurer intent meets customer reality. If a claims platform looks good in a demo but breaks down when handoffs, documents, and customer updates start piling up, that gap will show up quickly in a business like this.

The industry’s mistake is assuming more digitization automatically means better claims. In practice, digital tools often just move the friction around. If a customer can upload photos but still has to repeat the loss story to three different teams, or if an adjuster can see every file but cannot move the claim forward without chasing internal approvals, the insurer has modernized the surface without fixing the experience.

The regulator is making claims harder to ignore

The pressure is not just coming from customers. On December 18, 2025, the Financial Conduct Authority expanded its work on home and travel insurance after a Which? super-complaint, and the regulator said claims-satisfaction data, complaints numbers, and Financial Ombudsman Service data pointed to worsening performance up to 2024. That is a serious signal: claims is no longer being treated as an internal efficiency problem, but as a consumer outcomes problem.

The FCA’s 2026 insurance priorities, published on February 24, 2026, sharpen that message even further. Clearer consumer understanding of cover, better claims handling, and higher service quality sit at the center of the agenda. For insurers, that means claims systems are now part compliance infrastructure, part service engine, and part brand protection.

The customer data says the pain is real

The market numbers back up the regulator’s concern. J.D. Power’s 2025 U.S. Property Claims Satisfaction Study found 27 catastrophic events in 2024 and 28 in 2023, a reminder that weather and property losses keep pressure on claims teams. The study also found that the average claimant did not receive final payment until 44 days after first notice of loss, while the average claim cycle time from filing to finished repairs stretched to 32.4 days, the longest since the study began in 2008.

The overall satisfaction score came in at 682 on a 1,000-point scale, which is not the sort of number that suggests a smooth customer journey. J.D. Power also found that satisfaction rises when customers use digital tools, submit photos for estimates, and receive proactive updates, with app usage delivering the highest satisfaction among digital channels. That is the key nuance: digitization helps when it removes uncertainty and improves communication, not when it merely adds another front end.

Where claims tech still breaks down

This is the moment of truth for software vendors and insurer transformation teams. The industry has spent years digitizing claims, but too often it has digitized around the edges instead of fixing the core flow. The result is cosmetic progress, not genuine claims transformation.

The biggest gaps are easy to spot:

• FNOL intake still fails when the first notice of loss collects data but does not truly understand the claim. Good intake should capture the incident once, pull in policy context, trigger triage, and route the case correctly without forcing the customer to retell the story.
• Workflow handoffs still leak context between intake, handlers, repair networks, and adjusters. Every transfer that loses notes, photos, or authority turns a quick claim into a chain of follow-up calls.
• Document processing still bogs teams down when estimates, invoices, repair notes, and supporting evidence arrive in inconsistent formats. The best systems extract, classify, and validate documents quickly enough that people spend time deciding, not rekeying.
• Communications still feel reactive in too many insurers. The strongest claims journeys send proactive status updates by app, text, or email, so customers do not have to chase for basic visibility.
• Adjuster tools still lag when they are built for filing rather than field work. Adjusters need mobile access, photo capture, evidence trails, clear authority levels, and easy collaboration with the rest of the claim, not another screen that slows the visit down.

That is where the difference between digitized and transformed becomes obvious. Digitized claims may be paperless, but transformed claims are understandable. They make it easier for handlers to act, easier for customers to follow, and easier for insurers to show fairness under pressure.

What the Carpenters Group message really means

Richards and Smith were not just making a cultural point about empathy. They were describing the operational truth that insurance value is proven in the claim, not in the sale. If the system cannot keep the process coherent from FNOL through settlement, then every investment in AI, workflow automation, and digital submission risks becoming another layer of friction.

The industry already has enough evidence that claims is where trust is won. The insurers that take that seriously will stop treating claims as a back-office cost center and start treating it as the product itself. That is where the next competitive divide will be drawn.