Banking · Perspective · 3 min read
How legacy banking structures create friction in insurance groups
Many insurance groups run banking structures built up through acquisitions and regulatory constraint. Each arrangement looks manageable alone; together they create cost, friction and reduced visibility.
- Who this is for
- CFOs and finance leaders at brokers, managing agents, MGAs and P&I clubs.
- Why it matters
- Underwriting, capital and reporting have modernised. Banking architecture often has not, and it affects integration, working capital and governance.
Executive summary
- 1Acquisition layering leaves inherited, overlapping banking relationships.
- 2Trust and client money accounts add structural complexity.
- 3Treating banking as architecture, not admin, is a strategic choice.
What does legacy banking look like in insurance?
- Multiple inherited banking relationships
- Overlapping trust and client money accounts
- Fragmented liquidity structures
- Reduced visibility as processes become more automated
Why does it matter now?
In an environment of capital discipline and margin pressure, the combined effect of these arrangements warrants strategic attention rather than piecemeal fixes.
What can a structural review help with?
- Integrating acquisitions faster
- Improving capital and working capital efficiency
- Reducing operational friction
- Improving governance transparency
- Strengthening long-term banking relationships
Sources and methodology
- Bankhawk perspective. Practitioner view; no figures cited.
Map your insurance banking landscape
Tell us about your entities, trusts and client accounts. We will outline what a structural review would cover.
Discuss your insurance banking landscape