Stay informed with free updates

Simply sign up to the Oil myFT Digest — delivered directly to your inbox.

Oil prices fell sharply on Tuesday as fears that Israel would attack Iranian facilities receded and new forecasts damped the outlook for Chinese demand.

Brent crude, the international benchmark, fell as much as 5.3 per cent in early trading to $73.34 a barrel, before staging a partial recovery to trade 3.8 per cent lower. WTI, its US counterpart, dropped as much as 5.6 per cent before stabilising down 4.1 per cent.

The declines meant crude prices have fallen by a fifth from its peak this year, above $90 a barrel in April.

Prices have jumped in recent weeks over fears that the conflict between Israel and Iran would disrupt supplies. Tuesday’s sell-off was partly prompted by reassurances overnight from Israel that it would not seek to attack Iran’s oil infrastructure.

Instead, Israeli officials have told the US that they are planning to limit any counterstrike against Iran to military targets, according to two people close to the talks.

Meanwhile both Opec, the oil cartel, and the International Energy Agency trimmed their forecasts this week for oil demand next year, after continuing weakness in the Chinese market.

The IEA said on Tuesday that oil demand in China would grow by just 150,000 barrels a day in 2024, after consumption dropped for the fourth consecutive month in August, by 500,000 b/d.

“Chinese oil demand continues to undershoot expectations and is the principal drag on overall growth,” the IEA said.

It trimmed its overall forecast for oil demand growth this year by 40,000 b/d to 860,000 b/d. The agency also said oil demand would grow by about 1mn b/d in 2025, slightly higher than it predicted last month.

China, which accounted for almost 70 per cent of the world’s oil demand growth in 2024, will account for just a fifth of this year’s increase, the IEA said, underlining the rapid slowdown as the economy has weakened and the country’s shift to electric vehicles has accelerated.

Opec also cut its forecast for 2024 oil demand growth on Monday, but is projecting a much stronger outcome of 1.93mn b/d.

The IEA, which manages oil reserves for OECD countries, also said there were now more than 1.2bn barrels of stocks, and plenty of spare capacity among Opec members, to cushion any supply disruption.

“As supply developments unfold, the IEA stands ready to act if necessary,” the agency said. “For now, supply keeps flowing, and in the absence of a major disruption, the market is faced with a sizeable surplus in the new year.”

I read Kevin Carr’s latest opinion piece on his recent underwriting experience with interest and immediately messaged him for two reasons.

First, to remind him he remains significantly older than me but also to point out that, much as I agreed with the premise of his writing, I found it a bit heavy on problem and light on solution.

That said, I had to concede I couldn’t really think where the next leap in underwriting evolution was likely to come from either.

People Kev and my age saying “it’s probably AI” must sound like middle-aged people back in the 1990s suggesting “the internet” as the panacea to all life’s ills. Without context or insight, it’s meaningless rhetoric.

My roughly two decades in the life market have coincided with the digitisation of underwriting. When I was selling policies around the turn of the century, the paper application form was my only option.

Even the biggest and most controversial disruptors, such as UnderwriteMe, haven’t sought to change the game so much as make the game slightly easier to play

We carried bundles of these chunky documents around with us (at least one for each insurer we might recommend) and, while each had additional pages designed to capture information on any diagnosed conditions, immediate acceptance rates were low and GP reports common due to the limitations of the data capture available.

The magic of the internet allowed insurers to turn these paper monstrosities into digital processes, which, as well as alleviating the strain on brokers’ arms, allowed underwriters to include unlimited reflexive questions in order to capture point of sale data on disclosures.

This innovation has led to an all-time high in terms of immediate decision making and a reduction in the need for GP reports but has necessitated ever more complex and expensive rules technology which underwriters must integrate, manage and update.

Arguably, change is just as hard now as it was in the pre-digital age, it’s just that IT change stacks have replaced printer ink costs as the major blocker.

If real-time data sharing becomes a viable reality, insurers will be able to see far more about a customer than is currently available through a traditional application

When thinking about real innovation in the last 20 years, it’s hard to pinpoint anything which hasn’t, in reality, been an improvement or iteration of an existing process. Even the biggest and most controversial disruptors, such as UnderwriteMe, haven’t sought to change the game so much as make the game slightly easier to play.

I hear often about true personalisation being the key to revolution in underwriting. This means accessing the consumer data which exists in the ether through our NHS records, banking history and other financial activities, socioeconomic markers, television viewing habits, grocery purchases and exercise and health uploads. You name it, somewhere a company or organisation has consumer data on it.

By somehow pooling all this information, insurers could give accurate premiums with little or no further questions – a truly personalised and efficient underwriting process, which would mean no forms, digital or otherwise, and certainly no nurses popping round to Kev’s house to measure his particulars.

There are, however, significant hurdles to be cleared in order to reach this utopia, including: customer willingness to allow their data to be shared beyond the purpose for which they intended it (I don’t mind Netflix knowing what I watched on Saturday but I might not want to share it with the world), data protection laws and differing jurisdictions, and the infrastructure needed to integrate the myriad systems and software used by each data owner.

In a market which has seen prices falling in real terms over recent years, perhaps this wouldn’t be a bad thing

There is also a wider, philosophical consideration. Currently insurers ask for a limited amount of information on which to make an underwriting decision. This means that, in the true spirit of pooled risk, they are taking the chance there is information about a customer to which they are not privy. Indeed, it may be information to which the customer themselves is oblivious.

If real-time data sharing becomes a viable reality, insurers will be able to see far more about a customer than is currently available through a traditional application. Can they remain “blind” to some aspects in order to continue to offer cover to as wide a cohort as possible?

Of course, underwriting could be less intrusive and quicker right now, it’s just that gathering less data would mean increased premiums commensurate with the higher risk taken by the insurer. In a market which has seen prices falling in real terms over recent years, perhaps this wouldn’t be a bad thing.

Phil Jeynes is director of corporate strategy at Reassured

HUNDREDS of Tesco Bank customers are currently locked out of their credit card accounts and unable to make payments due to a system outage.

Customers report being unable to log into the Tesco mobile banking app and online banking platform.

1

According to DownDetector reports, over 590 users have encountered issues with the bank’s online services this morning.

More than 50% of the reported problems related to difficulties with mobile banking, while 35% of users experienced trouble accessing Internet banking.

Others claim they’ve been unable to use their credit card for online payments.

Frustrated customers have taken to social media to express their concerns.

One person posted on X (formerly Twitter): “I cannot log on to mobile app or internet banking.

“When trying to get on to internet banking, I get a message saying that Tesco is having difficulty sending a one-time code to my phone.”

Another said: “Are they down? I’ve been trying to pay Tesco bank bill online for the past two days with no luck.”

One customer who says their card payments have been declined said: “I’m constantly getting ‘This service is not available’ when trying to make a credit card payment online.”

However, another added: “I’ve made card payments online since the website and app went down but even telephone banking can’t access accounts.”

The Sun has contacted Tesco Bank for comment.

Tesco Bank provides a variety of personal banking and insurance products, including personal loans, credit cards, car insurance, and pet insurance, to over five million customers.

In February, Barclays agreed to purchase Tesco’s retail banking division, which included the acquisition of nearly 3,000 employees.

While Barclays will run these services, they will continue under the Tesco Bank name.

Plus, Tesco Bank will retain some of its banking activities, including insurance, ATMs, travel money and gift cards.

The sale still needs to be approved by regulators and it is expected to be completed before the end of 2024.

Tesco Bank stopped offering mortgages through its bank in 2019 after seven years.

It’s 23,000 mortgage loans were sold to Lloyds Banking Group, which Halifax is part of, for around £3.8billion.

Tesco Bank also offered current accounts, which were closed to all customers in November 2021.

Can I claim compensation for the outage?

Banks don’t have to pay out compensation to customers if there has been a drop in service, unlike how telecoms companies have to.

But if you have incurred costs as a result of service issues, it’s likely you could get your money back.

For example, if a bill payment didn’t go through as a result of an outage and you’ve been charged a fee for missing it, you should be able to claim that money back.

If your credit rating has been affected by a service outage, because you got a late payment fee after being unable to make a transaction, for example, you should also keep a record of this.

If you spoke to anyone to try and resolve the problem, make a note of their name and when you spoke to them, as well as roughly what you discussed and what they advised you to do.

You can find out more details about how to complain on the bank’s website.

It is worth gathering evidence of your problems so you can make a formal complaint to the bank directly.

What happens if my bank refuses to compensate me?

If you’re unhappy with how the bank dealt with your problem, you can contact the free Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS).

It is an independent body that will consider the evidence you present and make a fair decision about the action a bank should take.

The FOS can usually get involved 15 days after you’ve raised concerns with the bank.

In the case of an IT system outage at a bank, the FOS says any compensation depends on your circumstances and whether you lost out as a result.

If it thinks you did, it has the power to tell the bank to reimburse any fees, charges, or fines you were hit with, for example, if you were unable to make a payment on a credit card bill or to your mortgage provider.

It could also tell a bank to pay you for any money you didn’t receive, such as interest, if you weren’t able to pay money in.

If your credit score was affected, it may tell the bank to correct your credit file.

The FOS might also tell the bank to reimburse you for any extra costs you had to make, such as phone calls or trips to your local branch, as well as a payment for any inconvenience it caused.

Do you have a money problem that needs sorting? Get in touch by emailing money-sm@news.co.uk.

Plus, you can join our Sun Money Chats and Tips Facebook group to share your tips and stories