Question ID: 3286
Regulation Reference: (EU) No 2016/97 - Insurance Distribution Directive
Topic: Cross-selling (Art. 24 IDD)
Article: Article 24(3.)(N/A)
Status: Question forwarded to the European Commission
Date of submission: 07 Mar 2025
Question
Pursuant to IDD art. 24 nr. 3, first sentence, it follows that: “Where an insurance product is ancillary to a good or a service which is not insurance, as part of a package or the same agreement, the insurance distributor shall offer the customer the possibility of buying the good or service separately.” Is the phrase “insurance product is ancillary to a good or service which is not insurance”, and specifically the use of the word ancillary, meant as a reference to the definition of ancillary insurance intermediary in art. 2 nr. 1 (4) (b)? Is it thusly a requirement that the insurance product is sold as both compulsory and as a complementary product to the “main product” in order for the sale to be within the scope of the cross sales prohibition In art. 24 nr. 3?
Background of the question
We are aware that at least one of the national financial supervisory authorities (FSA) practice the prohibition in art. 24 nr. 3 so that the prohibition only applies in cases where the insurance product is sold as both compulsory and “complementary” to the service or good (ie. a travel insurance which is sold on a compulsory basis along with a travel service). According to this interpretation, the prohibition will not apply in cases where there is no complementary relation between the insurance product and the goods or services sold together, ie. a car is sold with a compulsory insurance which covers the buyers home property (provided that the insurance and car are not considered as complementary, which in our view they are not.)