The Leicester-based fintech insurer told FTAdviser it was ready to start working with advisers. Co-founder Phil Zeidler said: "We don’t want to work with life insurance specialists.
"No adviser in that space would sell our product, because we’re so much cheaper and so the commission is so much lower,” Zeidler explained.
“We suit advisers who don’t bother offering protection because it’s too hard or complicated. That’s where we’ll do well.”
As reported by FTAdviser, Deadhappy's founder estimated the difference in commission between advising on a traditional insurer’s policy and a Deadhappy one could be as big as £750, with the former earning an adviser £1,000 and the latter earning them just £250.
But responding to Zeidler's comments, former sole trader Harry Katz, who advised on protection as well as wider financial planning, said: "Commission?
"This was the big hole in the retail distribution review.
"Commission should be banned across the board. I had no problem charging a fee for protection. I just made a spreadsheet that showed the premium with commission, the commission paid and then the same thing, but without commission and then adding my fee.
"When clients saw what they saved over the term on a fee basis - it was a no brainer. Of course my fee was reasonable and a lot less than the potential commission.
"People still taking commission have no right to call themselves independent. They are the agents of the provider."
simoney.kyriakou@ft.com
