Mexico's National Commission for the Protection and Defense of Users of Financial Services published the results of its 2025 transparency supervision of 20 insurers offering Civil Liability and Professional Risks Insurance. After a two-stage review of disclosure and information quality, and once identified deficiencies had been corrected, 16 insurers received a score of 10, three were partially compliant and one remained non-compliant. The average score rose from 5.5 in the first stage to 9.6 at the end of the supervision process. The review covered contractual documentation, advertising, websites and customer files, including applications, policy schedules, general conditions, endorsements, premium receipts or invoices and policyholder rights booklets. The main failings included missing legends on exclusions and limitations, differences between contracts registered with the commission and those marketed, missing or incorrect RECAS numbers, incomplete or outdated regulatory legends, missing commission and customer service unit details, failure to evidence delivery of contractual documents and information booklets, omissions in early termination procedures and legal annexes, and inconsistent information on websites. Institutions were notified of the deficiencies for correction, and the commission noted that the findings do not exempt firms from applicable sanctions or other measures. The commission said it will continue strengthening supervisory actions on the clarity, transparency and safety of financial products for users.
CONDUSEF2026-05-15
Mexico's National Commission for the Protection and Defense of Users of Financial Services reports 16 of 20 insurers compliant after transparency review of civil liability and professional risks insurance
Mexico’s National Commission for the Protection and Defense of Users of Financial Services published results of its 2025 transparency supervision of 20 insurers offering Civil Liability and Professional Risks Insurance, finding significant improvements in disclosure after remediation, with the average score rising from 5.5 to 9.6 and 16 insurers achieving full compliance. Key deficiencies included unclear contractual information, missing regulatory legends and identifiers, incomplete disclosure of commissions and customer service details, and failures to evidence delivery of documents, which may still be subject to sanctions.