1. A simple indication of increased call centre and or claims processing productivity can be gained ;-

• CAPS Research today has uncovered that the average number of telephone calls managed by the call centre per accident claim is 5.3 calls.
• if for example 50% of these calls are claims status related and 90% speed improvement could be achieved from online information; with call centre staff of 100 and assuming the FTE costs were £20K, it would produce an annual saving of £900K.

2. The second part to the benefits case comes from closing the gaps in the overall claims process operation between the insurer, repairer and policyholder, through improved communications.

• It has been estimated that the overall cost of an insurance claim is around £2500 whilst the repair cost itself is only £1000 on average.
• There is an opportunity cost of £1500 a part of which is currently is wasted in manual and often duplicated inefficient admin communication processes across the whole supply chain.
• The CAPS consortium has estimated that £1000 of this infrastructure support costs is necessary to provide the call centres, courtesy cars and engineering that support the repair operation itself which leaves £500 of the cost of potential waste and duplication of effort
• Therefore even if only a very conservative top down goal of £50 per claim (10%) of this waste could be removed from this improved CAPS communications capability, this would translate to £2.5m for a 50K annual motor claim per year insurer.

3. The third part to the overall benefits case is based upon the improved efficiency of the repairer that results from collaborative working. This will remove some of the future upward pressure on labour rates for those insurers that actively support their repair network with margin improvement programmes.

• Current cycle time management profiles and benchmark experiences would suggest that the opportunity for the average repairer is £100K-£200K per annum profit improvement if all their external business process and administrative constraints to their operation were removed.
• If this improvement in bodyshop profitability simply reduced the upward pressure on labour rates by as little as 50p per hour our 50K annual motor insurer would save £2.5m annually.

The Generic Business case for Line item invoice matching and automatic payment applications.

CAPS xml 2 will deliver all the line item invoice submission details from a bodyshops management system. The business case therefore:

• Current practice was to pay bodyshop invoices if they were submitted within 1.5% -2% of the approved estimate on the grounds that the cost of manually examining the line items of each of these invoices was greater than the potential saving that might be made, if an error in that invoice could be found and acknowledged by the repairer.
• By having electronic line item comparisons of invoice to estimate much tighter and variable tolerances can be placed upon each component of the invoice. E.g. 0.5% on labour and paint and perhaps 1%-2% on parts.
• Overall savings of 1% of the cost of claims could therefore easily become achievable for those manual operations that today still pay within the 2% overall limit.

A 1% repair cost saving is £10 per claim (assuming an average repair cost of £1000) therefore for a work provider who has 50K annual claims volume this translates to possible opportunity saving of £500K per annum.

This cost saving does not include an estimate for personnel productivity savings achieved from an automatic payments application.

Summary benefits

The introduction of CAPS to an insurers network will have both immediate cost saving benefits through administration and call centre productivity savings and longer term business process improvements that lead to far more efficient cycle times and hours per job per day productivities.

	Short Term	Long Term
Bodyshop (£2m)	£15-£25K per site	£150k-£250k per site
Insurer (£50k)	£1.4m	£5m