1 / 16

Non-medical Professional Liability Directors & Officers Liability Insurance

Non-medical Professional Liability Directors & Officers Liability Insurance. CAS Seminar on Ratemaking March 7-8, 2002. Jason Israel, ACAS, MAAA. D & O Coverage Background. Directors and Officers policies insure: directors and officers

carissamoffitt
Download Presentation

Non-medical Professional Liability Directors & Officers Liability Insurance

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Non-medical Professional LiabilityDirectors & Officers Liability Insurance CAS Seminar on Ratemaking March 7-8, 2002 Jason Israel, ACAS, MAAA

  2. D & O Coverage Background Directors and Officers policies insure: • directors and officers • historically, only D’s & O’s, but broadened in soft market of 90’s to include entity • for wrongful acts • which are defined as any act, error or omission in their capacity as D&O.

  3. D & O Coverage Background Director’s & Officer’s provides Management Liability protection for claims coming from: • Stockholders • Employees • Government and Competitors • Customers and Clients

  4. D & O Coverage Background D&O versus EPL A typical D&O policy will provide coverage for a Director or officer against claims such as discrimination and wrongful termination. So would an EPL policy. So why do companies also buy an EPL policy? A D&O policy generally: • Has higher deductibles and/or coinsurance • Provides narrower coverage, especially defense • Covers only D&O not entities or other employees (although sometimes added by endorsement)

  5. D & O Coverage Background Where does the money go? • For publicly traded firms, shareholder (securities) claims result in the majority of the losses • For Private and not-for-profit firms • less or no exposure to shareholder claims • majority of claims are from employees

  6. D & O Historical Perspective Mid 1990’s - D&O Pricing Erosion • Reduction of Deductibles/Retentions • Introduction of Blended Program discounts (combining EPL, Fiduciary & E&O under single limit) • Multi-Year programs with significant discounts • Pricing did not recognize expansions in coverage

  7. D & O Historical Perspective Mid 1990’s - Coverage Expansion • Entity Coverage - eliminated allocation issues between D&O’s and uninsured corporation, but also lost “natural coinsurance” • Bilateral ERP’s (insured may elect, even if they choose to cancel or non-renew) • Policies non-cancelable by insurers • Broadened definition of claim to cover: • formal investigations • non-monetary demands • criminal proceedings • formal administrative proceedings

  8. D & O Historical Perspective Litigation Landscape: • 1995 PSLRA (Reform Act) • Higher Pleading Standard • Stay of Discovery • Increased Market Capitalization and Volatility • Increased IPO/M&A Activity • Increased Claims for Insider-Trading/Accounting Fraud/Revenue Recognition • Recession influences

  9. D & O Historical Perspective Litigation Landscape • Results: • Jurisdiction has changed from CA to NY • Allegations have changed from promises about future performance, now protected by disclaimers, to accounting irregularities • Dismissals without leave to refile are down, as courts allow plaintiffs to ‘figure out’ the new Act and perfect filings • Settlements lag, since plaintiffs’ cases that survive motions to dismiss are stronger than before and hence demands are higher

  10. D & O Historical Perspective Record number of large claims : • Cendant 3.5 b • Bank of America 490 m • 3Com Corp 259 m • Waste Mgmt I 220 m • Waster Mgmt II 457 m • Ikon 111 m • Informix 142 m

  11. D & O Historical Perspective • - Increased frequency: • Frequency back up to pre-Reform Act levels, with an increased number of securities filings: IPO/ Laddering cases Source: securities.stanford.edu

  12. D & O Historical Perspective A different pattern emerging for large firms? 7% 6% All Public Companies 5% Larger Firms 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 2002 (Annualized) 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Source: securities.stanford.edu

  13. Actuarial Considerations Key D&O Pricing Issues/Obstacles Low Frequency High Severity Bankruptcy/Persistency Complicated Program Structures Market-based Pricing

  14. Actuarial Considerations Key D&O Pricing Considerations Ownership - Public vs. Private Size of Firm Sector Coverages/Terms/Limits provided

  15. Actuarial Modeling Modeling claim severity: Reasonable fits with Ln(Loss)= a * log(MCap) + b + e

  16. Actuarial Modeling Modeling claim severity: Much Variability remains 90 80 70 60 Actual Settlements($M) 50 40 Median Loss 30 20 10 0 .0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 Model's Expected Severity ($M)

More Related