RAS-GENERALI/IAMA CONSULTING
PRESS RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE
THE COMPETITION AUTHORITY HAS RULED THAT THE DATABASE ON LIFE ASSURANCE AND PENSION PRODUCTS CONSTITUTES AN ANTICOMPETITIVE AGREEMENT
At its meeting on 30 September 2004, the Competition Authority resolved to close the investigation into numerous life assurance companies, ruling that their conduct had constituted an anti-competitive agreement.
The investigation had begun following the submission of two voluntary notices regarding the agreement by Riunione Adriatica di Sicurtà Spa and Assicurazioni Generali Spa – also on behalf of some of the companies belonging to the Group, including Alleanza Assicurazioni Spa, Ina Vita Spa and Generali Vita Spa – referring to the acquisition of a databank, named Aequos, relating to life assurance and pension insurance products, supplied by the consultancy company Iama Consulting Srl (hereafter Iama).
The examination was subsequently extended to the following companies, which had previously purchased Aequos: Banco Popolare di Verona e Novara Scarl, Capitalia Spa, Fideuram Vita Spa, Intesa Vita Spa, Mediolanum Vita Spa, Montepaschi Vita Spa, Nationale Nederlanden Levensverzekering Maatschappij N.V., San Paolo Imi Wealth Management Spa and Winterthur Vita Spa.
Aequos was claimed to contain information on the terms and conditions applying to all life assurance policies, taken from the documentation that the insurance companies give to their customers. This data is sensitive, disaggregated and issued at very close intervals.
The investigation revealed, however, that the Iama company had not gathered the information input into the Aequos database directly from the market (as the parties had claimed), but that the data had been supplied to Iama by the companies themselves, which Iama had reprocessed and then given back to the insurance companies purchasing the database.
This investigation made it possible, firstly, to ascertain that the Aequos data had an added value in comparison with data acquired directly by individual companies directly from the market, and was designed solely for insurance companies; secondly, it enabled the Authority to ascertain that consumers were not in a position to appraise the information contained in the database in order to properly compare competing insurance products.
All these elements taken together were considered to constitute an anti-competitive agreement, on the grounds that it was likely to encourage collusion between the parties to it.
Lastly, the investigation made it possible to ascertain that the Riunione Adriatica di Sicurtà Spa insurance company was extraneous to this information circuit. For since Ras had made its acquisition of Aequos conditional upon obtaining authorisation from the Authority, it had never in fact received the database, and unlike the other companies involved, it had never benefited from it.
Rome, 19 October 2004