How new product developments transform claims and recoveries
New products promise growth but also reshape how insurers handle claims and recoveries, inviting a reimagining of processes, documentation, and risk
At the Berne Union’s Claims and Recoveries Specialists Meeting in June 2025, a breakout session titled “New Product Developments and the Implications For Claims and Recoveries” examined the implications of new products for insurance policies, claims handling processes, and recovery strategies. A pre-meeting survey of 30 Export Credit Agencies and Private Credit Insurers gathered perspectives on the challenges faced in adapting claims and recovery processes to such products. The survey findings and session discussions together provide a clear basis for assessing the current situation and putting forward recommendations for the future.
A web-based form distributed over a three-week period posed the following questions to the 30 participants:
- In the last three years, have you or your claims/recoveries team been involved in any product development process? Please describe the type and intended purpose of the developed products.
- Did you encounter any challenges in claims or recovery processes directly related to the developed product? If so, please specify.
- Which process/function within your organisation required the most adaptation as a result of the new product development process? Please share any other views or additional comments.
Given the direct impact of product development in export credit insurance on claims and recovery processes, the first question was designed to measure the extent of involvement of the relevant teams. Eight of the 30 institutions indicated they had participated in new product development processes in the past three years, with claims and recovery specialists from various export credit insurers confirming their active involvement.
Product diversity and innovative practices
Responses to the question regarding the type and scope of developed products, as well as the discussions held during the session, demonstrated that claims and recovery teams have contributed to the development of various product models. These extend beyond the narrow definition of ‘new product development’ and include revising existing products through new guarantee structures, risk-sharing mechanisms, and workflows integrated with digitalisation. The products can be classified under the following categories:
Digital systems and process automation: One response described the development of a digital platform enabling insured clients to directly upload shipment, provisioning, and claims documents, eliminating the need for manual document requests and postal submissions during the claims process and thereby reducing processing times. The major challenge posed by this system, however, was the inability to verify the content of uploaded documents in real time, which exposed the process to document fraud risk. Since the indemnification liability in export credit insurance largely depends on the accuracy of commercial documentation, these systems also necessitate the digitalisation of document verification mechanisms.
Portfolio guarantees for short-term receivables: Another response detailed the development of new short-term trade credit solutions to support financing flows in B2B marketplaces and address growing capital needs. Despite detailed financial and risk analyses, delays in payment by certain buyers emerged as a significant point of concern. Moreover, suspicious transactions inconsistent with commercial activities or the debtor’s geographic location were detected and identified as fraud cases. Such fraudulent activities undermine the commercial reality underlying policy indemnification obligations and necessitate a deeper approach to risk assessment. Strengthening document checks and client verification mechanisms is critical to prevent similar occurrences.
Sector-specific and green products: Another participant’s response referred to a green credit guarantee product that aims to support domestic green investments, and to another programme which introduces a new working capital credit guarantee model for start-up companies. These innovative products entail more complex decision-making processes than conventional credit insurance and require new collaboration mechanisms among stakeholders. Establishing decision-making forums, strengthening governance structures, and enhacing interdepartmental coordination is vital for the effective management of such products.
One contribution described a product covering termination fee nonpayment on swap trading contracts. This goes beyond classical export credit insurance by linking the risk-based payment obligation to the counterparty’s termination of the contract. Another related to new factoring insurance products for short-term receivables and a top-up cover. The institution acknowledged its limited practical experience, which makes ensuring operational alignment in document flows and risk-sharing dimensions a challenge. Enhancing internal procedures and IT infrastructure was identified as a critical priority.
Hybrid models: A hybrid product described by one respondent provides both credit allocation and export insurance coverage under the same contractual structure, where the credit limit established between the financial institution and the exporter is simultaneously insured. This deviates from classical claim notification procedures, necessitating specially defined process flows and document checklists.
Claims and recovery challenges
From an international commercial law perspective, the most significant area of transformation brought about by new products is the redefinition of obligations under the insurance contract, and the ability to foresee necessary measures for resolving potential legal disputes arising from their breach. Claims and recovery challenges can be summarised under five headings:
Data accuracy and document quality: Many institutions reported payments could not be made during the claims process due to fraudulent documents, incomplete paperwork, and discrepancies between transactions and documents. For example, one participant that was not directly involved in the new product development process stated its main challenge was verifying the accuracy of data and the acceptability of submitted documents. The lack of early integration of claims teams into the product development process increases uncertainties related to document flows, adversely affecting the speed and accuracy of claims assessment. Another insurer explicitly reported multiple fraud incidents related to new products.
Misalignment in claims filing timelines: One participant noted discrepancies exist between the deadlines set for indemnity payments and the time needed for insured banks to respond to requests for additional documents or information. Further, some applicant banks do not fully understand the documentation and procedures required before submitting claims, leading to delays and additional review costs. To prevent such communication gaps, guidance for the insured should be strengthened, training expanded, and document requirements made more transparent in digital form.
Lack of process ownership: Discussions revealed a lack of clarity throughout the product development process regarding who makes decisions, which documents are mandatory, and under which scenarios a claim is automatically paid or rejected. This in turn complicates the functioning of internal control mechanisms.
Uncertainties in policy provisions: Most new products are offered based on existing policy texts, but specific provisions related to the product may prove inadequate at the time of indemnification. This creates grounds for disputes between the insurer and insured parties that could escalate into litigation.
Lack of internal coordination: Several institutions highlighted insufficient information flow between teams, which could be mitigated by the greater participation of claims and recovery units in product development.
Processes requiring the greatest adaptation
The following graph illustrates the areas participants identified as requiring the most adaptation due to new products:
During the session, participants indicated that the adaptation challenges encountered in these areas are not merely technical but also carry significant legal implications. The discussions can be summarised under the following headings:
Legal documentation and policy wording: Many institutions face difficulties integrating new products into existing policy texts. Traditional risk definitions are often inadequate for describing new risk types, and critical sections such as coverage clauses, premium calculation, indemnity payment provisions, and rights of recourse provisions often need to be rewritten.
Claims processes: Participants emphasised that delays and misinterpretations may occur if workflows for claims applications are not aligned with the documentation required by new products. Failure to update document checklists may lead to delays in indemnity payment decisions.
Interdepartmental coordination: For many institutions, the issue of claims and recovery units becoming involved too late or not at all in the product development process remains unresolved. This can result in discrepancies between the coverage conditions promised by the policy and the actual conditions for indemnity payments, potentially causing client dissatisfaction.
Coverage assessment procedures: Participants noted that the inclusion of certain risk types under the policy often only becomes clear during the claims application stage, generating operational uncertainty.
Recovery strategies: If recovery clauses are not tailored to the debtor profile of the product, their effectiveness is diminished. Authorisation for pre-indemnity recoveries, consolidated debt monitoring, and similar structures may conflict with traditional enforcement strategies, underscoring the need for clear arrangements in this area.
IT system adaptation: Participants noted that failing to integrate digital document upload platforms with traditional systems weakens process traceability. The lack of version control and timestamp features in particular were emphasised for digital platforms.
Conclusions and future outlook
Topics that emerged during the session on the claims side included claims application timelines, divergent interpretations of policy clauses, and how risks are addressed in policies. For recovery processes, the focus was on tailoring recovery clauses to the debtor profile, consolidated account monitoring of debtors, and related practices.
Recommendations from the claims perspective included discussing indemnity payment criteria with claims specialists before product launch and conducting detailed reviews of indemnity payment scenarios within policy texts. From the recovery perspective, recommendations included clarifying when recovery authorisation will be assumed and ensuring policy clauses are aligned with the debtor structure foreseen for the target product.
Activities related to new products are not merely technical in nature but entail significant structural and legal implications for claims and recovery processes. New product activities should be carried out with full consideration of their impact on claims and recovery processes and treated by institutions as a strategic area of transformation.
