The FCA Pure Protection Market Study: What the Protection Gap Means for Advisers
I’m an adviser first.
I’ve owned and run protection firms since 2015, under both directly authorised and network models. Most of my working life has been spent sat across a desk (or a kitchen table) talking about what happens if someone dies, gets ill or can’t work.
So it’s fair to ask why I’ve ended up building software.
A big part of my business was built on partnering with mortgage brokers and IFAs.
They all knew they should be providing protection advice. Their clients needed it, the mortgage was the perfect moment to raise it, and nobody was arguing about whether it was the right thing to do.
They just didn’t have the time or the resource to do it properly. So they passed the protection to us.
Doing that for years taught me a lot. I know from start to finish exactly what’s needed on a protection case, and what that journey looks like for both the adviser and the client. And I know how to help a firm get the most out of the protection opportunities sitting inside every mortgage.
If I’m honest, it isn’t the client.
Speaking to the client is one thing; most advisers are good at that, and clients are usually grateful someone has raised it.
The problem is everything that comes afterwards…
The research. The quotes. The underwriting questions. The recommendation. The client presentation. The suitability letter. Checking the policy documents when they come back. Every one of those takes time, and every one of them has to stand up to a file check.
That’s the bit that takes forever. And when you’ve got a pipeline of mortgage cases to get through, it’s the bit that gets dropped.
I’ve seen first-hand what it costs when it’s done badly too. In February 2024 our network brought in a new letter format, and the first business protection case reviewed under it was marked as a fail. No grace period, straight in at the deep end. I thought that was a little unfair (and I still do), but it taught me how much rides on the paperwork.
The idea is simple. You get to see the client and make the sale, and Clerica handles everything else behind the scenes.
Record the meeting (we partner with Plaud for that) or take your existing client fact-find, and Clerica will create a protection recommendation in seconds. Branded and ready to present to your client, or to amend at the click of a button. All fully backed-up with a detailed recommendation letter.
Once the client goes ahead, upload the provider documents and Clerica renames them and checks them against the fact-find (wrong date of birth, wrong term, wrong sum assured… the usual suspects). It also flags the gaps, so if you’ve only recommended life cover and there’s nothing for illness or loss of income, it’ll point that out.
I wrote the recommendation reasons in Clerica myself. Things like “Most favourable pre-sales underwriting” or “Cheapest provider within non-medical limits”. They’re the reasons I’ve been giving clients for years, worded the way a file checker wants to see them.
I want to be clear on this. Clerica is not a robo-adviser.
The advice is still yours. The relationship is still yours. Clerica just takes away the hours of admin that stop most firms offering protection in the first place.
It’s built by advisers, for advisers. Every feature has come from something that slowed me down on a real case.
The FCA has just told us that 58% of people have no protection at all (I wrote about the protection gap a couple of weeks ago). A lot of those people are already sat in front of a mortgage broker or an IFA.
The good news is – the time problem is now solved. If you’re a broker or IFA who knows you should be doing more protection, this is exactly why I built Clerica… so you can.
Have a look at how Clerica works or book a demo. No set-up fees and no long-term contracts. Or just drop me an email – I’m always happy to chat it through with another adviser.
