Market Conduct Examination Preparation Checklist

This checklist covers the records and controls examiners typically ask for in a market conduct review: exam scope tracking, underwriting files, claims files, complaint register and complaint files, sales practice records, and remediation readiness. It is designed to help you assemble source documents, confirm traceability, and identify gaps before the examiner arrives. It is not a substitute for the exam itself; it is a preparation tool for the internal team. The output is a cleaner submission package and a clearer view of where documentation is missing.

Compliance usually owns the checklist, but it works best when underwriting, claims, customer service, sales operations, and legal each provide their own records. A single coordinator should track requests, due dates, and status so the package stays consistent. For larger exams, assign one owner per section and one reviewer to reconcile the final submission. That structure reduces missed files and avoids conflicting versions.

Use it as soon as an exam notice arrives, then update it throughout the response period until submission is complete. Many teams also reuse it for internal mock exams, annual compliance reviews, or after a regulator requests follow-up materials. If your business has recurring market conduct exams, keeping the checklist ready year-round makes the response much faster. It is especially useful when multiple lines of business or entities are in scope.

The template prompts you to confirm that the complaint register includes every complaint in the exam period and that each entry can be tied back to a file. It also pushes you to reconcile complaint counts against regulatory reports and internal tracking reports before submission. That matters because mismatches between the register, the files, and the reported totals are a common exam issue. The checklist also surfaces repeat complaints and trends that management may need to explain.

The most common problems are missing source documents, incomplete file indexing, inconsistent complaint counts, and unsupported underwriting or claims decisions. Teams also get caught when exceptions or overrides were approved informally but not documented in the file. Another frequent issue is submitting sales materials or producer records that are out of date or not tied to the sampled transaction. This checklist is built to catch those gaps before the examiner does.

Yes. You can add line-of-business-specific requests, state-specific reporting items, or entity-level document owners without changing the core structure. Many teams add extra fields for policy form versions, state filing references, producer appointment status, or claim handling benchmarks. The template is meant to be adapted to the actual exam notice and the records requested by the regulator. Keep the request log and source-owner traceability intact even when you customize.

No. It works alongside your document repository, case management system, and compliance tracking tools. The checklist gives you a controlled way to organize what the examiner asked for, while your systems remain the source of record. If you use a GRC platform, you can map request numbers, owners, and due dates into it and use this template as the working view. That combination is usually better than relying on ad hoc email threads.

Document the gap immediately, assign an owner, and note whether the issue is a retrieval problem, a process failure, or a true record deficiency. If the file cannot be reconstructed, escalate to compliance leadership and legal so the response is accurate and consistent. Do not fill gaps with unsupported summaries unless the examiner specifically accepts them and the source limitation is disclosed. The checklist includes remediation tracking so missing items are visible rather than buried.