“By investigating a case aggressively at the outset, it was often possible to have a developed factual matter for analysis within 90 days, maybe as long as 6 months, depending on the cooperation of any third‑party claimant and other sources of information. By having that development, one could set accurate reserves earlier. The insurer would know where it stood, and actuaries could also have access to that data and reassess a particular book of business or a particular program to see how profitable it may be over time and make adjustments, rather than canceling a program as unprofitable, should development and accurate reserve setting take longer, such as years versus months. Another important function was the interaction between claims handlers and underwriters. The two go hand in hand. Underwriters have a certain view of the world and ways they want to approach coverage, but it’s the claims people who must handle the result and keep up to date with the latest case law affecting liability and/or coverage. Such teamwork results in tighter and more successful programs including decisions as to whether or not policy language needs to be changed or the need to add additional exclusions based on developing appellate decisions that might create new perils. That level of communication was important, especially for innovative insurance companies. Where the intent is to cover something as communicated to the applicant, the claim department might not be aware of it, resulting in a claim denial.”

“This number (224) likely represents just a small fraction of the notice-based denials that never make their way to a courtroom. More must bedone to educate policyholders on how to comply with their policies’ claims-made reporting requirements. How did notice-based denials under claimsmade forms become so common? To understand how the industry has arrived at this point, it is important to explore the history and evolution of the claims-made form. There are six main reasons for these denials. 1.Late reporting of a claim after policy expiration 2.Failure to disclose known claims or potential facts and circumstances that could give rise to claims later on an application (and not reporting same under the notice of potential claim provisions) 3.Failure to identify that the current claim being reported is related to a prior claim reported to a previous insurer or previous policy with the same insurer 4.Failure to disclose prior-pending claims made on an insurance application 5.Reporting the claim in a manner that is not as directed by the policy language itself 6.Claims denied for not reporting “as soon as practicable” The main driver of denials is that the policyholder reported the claim after the policy expired, as represented by 101 denials upheld by the courts. Not too far behind that category is the situation where the insured knew of a claim or wrongful act before the inception of a policy. Here is a breakdown of the six categories. … “

“Overall, many of the more common issues were explored in previous articles. That is not to say, however, that these are complete solutions. I have long been of the belief that extended reporting provisions, when invoked, are an incomplete solution for long-term protection. That is because one is taking a limit of liability and stretching it across at least one year and sometimes six years or more. The limits, thus, are never refreshed. So, if there are any claims during the extended reporting term, policy limits are being eroded. This could mean that policy limits could be extinguished by claim frequency, and the benefit of runoff would be lost when that happens before the term had even run out.”

“There are inherent dangers when a company is acquired, not only for the selling company, but for the acquiring company. It is not uncommon for the buyer to require the seller purchase several years of extended reporting coverage. This is because the buyer, when either acquiring the assets or the stock transaction, wants no exposure to any known or unknow liabilities created by activities before the acquisition. We’ve all seen companies get acquired, with the seller invoking whatever extended reporting coverage they can acquire, sometimes at a significant price. But that is not the only problem, and this is where the approach and analysis become important. Asking the right questions is thus necessary to provide the appropriate financial protection to those involved, with the avoidance of any error and omission claim that might be made against the broker, despite whether they are simply following an “order take” standard or not.”

“laims made insurance policies have existed for a long time. For specialty line insurance policies, such as directors and officers liability, professional liability, cyber liability etc., they are the most common type of policy issued. They are complex, and depending on the definition of claim, as well as whether or not it’s a claims made and reported form, the policies can be extremely dangerous. What follows is the first installment of a three-part series on the complexities involved in securing extended reporting coverage in conjunction with claims made policies. I have written numerous articles on claims made trigger problems, prior act problems, prior pending claim exclusions, etc. These only make the problems more dangerous for insureds and for insurance producers. However, and unfortunately, one important aspect of the policy that I’ve somewhat been lax to review in depth is the complexity of the extended reporting provision (ERP) and the ability to buy optional extended reporting period coverage, also known as runoff coverage and/or retirement coverage. Even my own article, The Dangers that May Lurk in All Claims Made Policies, raises extended reporting provisions, but not in depth.”

We’re asked frequently how to form a successful insurance agency. And while the answer seems painfully obvious that the number one thing you need is sales, that’s only part of the overall picture.

This article discusses some of the physical risks adjusters face in fieldwork and the emotional risks they face in an increasingly stressful claims arena. It offers tips and solutions for both adjusters and those who manage a claims team.

This is from the latest — Spring 2021 issue of the CPCU Interest Group (CLEW) that includes a focus on expert witnessing.

“IN 2010, I authored an article on the dangers of absolute exclusions.1 That article was prompted by an appellate decision in Florida, James River Ins. Co. v. Ground Down Eng’g, 540 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2008). In that case, an engineering firm that was providing consulting services on whether land had become polluted found that its errors and omissions (E&O) policy, which covered it as an environmental consultant, didn’t cover pollution!”

During this unprecedented time of state-mandated business shutdowns and stay-at-home orders, you cannot afford to risk errors and omissions claims against your agency. An ounce of prevention now could be worth a pound of E&O cure in the future.

Cyber Risk & Insurance While cyber threats have been a concern for more than a decade, the last eighteen months have been marked by a number of large-scale cyber breaches. These breaches caused companies and insurers to expend considerable financial resources to recover from the breach and mend their damaged public images. As a result of the increase in cyber threats, public and private entities are scrambling to ensure the security of their systems and the information and data these systems store. As part of the risk management analysis presented by cyber threats, companies of all sizes are evaluating their existing insurance policies to understand what, if anything, traditional insurance policies will cover with respect to cyber claims. In most instances, obtaining additional cyber coverage, either through special endorsement to existing policies or through a stand-alone cyber liability policy, is necessary.

•Wrongful Designation by Thomas M. Braniff, JD, CPCU and Robert P. Gaddis, JD; •The Essential Bookshelf for Expert Witnesses by Kevin Quinley, CPCU, ARM, AIC; •The 411 on Becoming an Expert Witnesses by Elise M. Farnham, CPCU, ARM, AIM, CPIW; •Working as an Expert Witnesses by Douglas R. Emerick; and •“Be Careful What You DON’T Ask For” By Bill Wilson, CPCU, ARM, AIM, AAM.

In today’s business climate more focus is placed on lean operations. This trend is becoming increasingly more commonplace as corporations are divesting of business lines and returning to core competencies. As decentralization continues to grow and corporations are relying on supply and sales agreements with non-related parties, the impact of a supplier or customer’s loss on a business’ operations increases substantially.

Maintaining client relationships is critical for insurance brokers and agencies, especially given the fact that developing new commercial clients involves a significant time investment to understand the client’s business and risks and to implement solutions for risk transfer. Once insurance coverage is in place and policies are issued, the focus of the agency switches to servicing the account. The agency is happy. The client is happy. But what happens when your client experiences a significant property loss?

“Diminishing limits policies create a host of potential problems for insurance company claim departments. As is well known the insurance industry has long been plagued with “nuisance” claims. While in some instances insurance companies make quick settlements of nuisance claims to avoid defense cost expenditures, in others, insurers will attempt to resist such claims to avoid setting a precedent, thereby sending a message to the plaintiff’s bar that nuisance claims will not be honored. Considering that defense costs are deducted from the policy’s aggregate limits, either course of action places an insurance company in a difficult position. … “

This is a monthly column in which agents can pose questions related to E&O (Errors & Omissions) risk management and loss control as it relates to sales, service and operations. This month’s column focuses on using professional designations in advertising and whether doing so can create a higher expectation from the customer.

I was often amazed at what I could only discern as an argument by a Plaintiff’s attorney concerning an insurance claim where he had never bothered to read the policy or have a true of understanding of insurance.

As insurance professionals, we are often so busy serving our clients that our writing and publishing take a back seat to our practice. Consistent publication keeps us in the public eye and allows us to rank higher on Google.

Lead-In – How does Obamacare affect the value of health insurance agencies being bought, sold or perpetuated? Read this innovative method of transacting health insurance businesses.

This article explores the nuances of the special relationship and provides a template for the producer, the policyholder and their respective attorneys to follow by illustrating the circumstances that give rise to the special relationship between the producer and the policyholder/insured.

It appears that the recent change in The State of Michigan workers compensation act extends Michigan’s jurisdiction to all Michigan Residents no matter where in the US (or the World) the resident is hired, works or is injured.

The Glass Ceilings are not just a condition – they are mental attitudes that stop agency owners from growing their businesses. Learn how to identify them and how to defeat them to “crack” the limitations on your business through this article.

The special relationship doctrine can create an overwhelming burden for the unsuspecting insurance agent or broker by imposing a duty to provide advice to a policyholder concerning all possible coverages and in some instances a responsibility to give advice as to what limits to purchase and whether such limits are “adequate.” This article explores the nuances of the special relationship and provides a template for the producer, the policyholder and their respective attorneys to follow by illustrating the circumstances that give rise to the special relationship between the producer and the policyholder/insured.

The Affinity business is a $100B+ market in the United States with a long history in the life and health arena. Despite that track record it is often misunderstood in the broader market. This paper provides background for any entity interested in getting into that space or already active in it.

This is a monthly column in which agents can pose quetions related to E&O (Errors & Omissions) risk management and loss control as it relates to sales, service and operations. This month’s column focuses on using professional designations in advertising and whether doing so can create a higher expectation from the customer.

When insurance is intended to be the primary assurance that indemnification agreements are properly funded, it is critical that contract language is written in such a way that insurance policies are able to respond. Crafting insurance and indemnification agreements is an art that involves understanding the nature of risks transferred, the nature of risks assumed and how to best protect a client from the legal and financial implications of those risks. It also requires an understanding of insurance policies and the type of coverage they can or cannot provide. This article explores the issues and problems related to drafting insurance, indemnification and hold harmless agreements.