Technical Updates – British Insurance Brokers' Association https://www.biba.org.uk The British Insurance Brokers' Association is the UK's leading general insurance intermediary organisation Wed, 13 Dec 2017 16:30:43 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.8.4 Recent Motor Insurance Case Law extending ‘Use of a Vehicle’ under the Road Traffic Act following the CJEU ‘Vnuk’ judgement https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/recent-motor-insurance-case-law-extending-use-vehicle-road-traffic-act-following-cjeu-vnuk-judgement/ Tue, 17 Oct 2017 11:11:56 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=28135 Use of a Vehicle – R&S Pilling (t/a Phoenix Engineering) v UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 259 In this case the Court of Appeal

The post Recent Motor Insurance Case Law extending ‘Use of a Vehicle’ under the Road Traffic Act following the CJEU ‘Vnuk’ judgement appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Use of a Vehicle – R&S Pilling (t/a Phoenix Engineering) v UK Insurance Ltd [2017] EWCA Civ 259

In this case the Court of Appeal held that repairs to a vehicle were considered to be use of a vehicle.

Mr Holden, employed by R&S Piling, was permitted to undertake repairs to his car in R&S Piling’s factory premises.  In the course of the repair his car caught light whilst he was welding it and the fire spread to his employer’s factory premises and adjoining premises.

AXA Insurance were Property and Public Liability insurer of R&S Piling and UK Insurance were Mr Holden’s motor insurer.  AXA brought a claim against UK Insurance arguing that the repairs were consistent with use of a vehicle.  The judge held that held that undergoing repairs was not part of the normal function of a vehicle, and that it was an “accident” as it was a fortuitous or unexpected event.  AXA were allowed to appeal.

The Court of Appeal  judgement was  that carrying out repairs by Holden to enable the car to be in a safe condition and pass its MOT so he could continue to drive it was consistent with the normal function of a car.

The Master of the Rolls held that such an interpretation was consistent with the EU Motor Insurance Directive’s aim in protecting victims of motor accidents, and also with the wording of the Directive, which used the word “use” rather than “operate” or “drive”.

Use of a Vehicle – Christopher Wastell v (1) Estate of Gordon John Woodward (Deceased) (2) Chaucer Syndicates Ltd [2017]

Woodward owned a hamburger van which was parked in a layby.  He had stepped out into the road whilst returning to his van after displaying a sign for his business on the opposite side of the road. Woodward was hit by a motorcycle and was killed instantly and Wastell, the motorcyclist, was badly injured.

Woodward had no public liability insurance, but his partner had a motor insurance policy insured with Chaucer Syndicates, on which he was a named driver. The policy, however, did not cover the use of the van as a business.

The issue for the court was whether the accident arose out of “the use of a vehicle” for the purpose of s. 145(3) of the Road Traffic Act [1988] which provides that compulsory motor insurance must insure the drivers named in the policy in respect of death or personal injury “caused by, or arising out of, the use of the vehicle on a road or other public place”. 

Chaucer Syndicates argued the motor vehicle was not being used as such and instead was being used as a stationary hamburger van with the purpose of selling burgers to passers-by. Furthermore the activity of placing and adjusting a business sign was a self-contained activity.

The Court had to determine ‘what was the use of the vehicle on the road’ and then ask ‘whether the accident arose out of that use’. The relevant use in this case was a hamburger van. Although Woodward and his partner did not disclose to Chaucer Syndicates that the van was to be used in this capacity, that was found to be irrelevant – the claim had to be dealt with according to the wording of the Road Traffic Act rather than the scope of the contract of insurance.

The accident arose out of the use of the van as a hamburger van which was parked up in order to sell hamburgers and Woodward was in the process of returning to his van after putting up a sign to further that activity. It was held that the accident was closely linked to using the van on the road and the issue was determined in favour of Wastell.

The post Recent Motor Insurance Case Law extending ‘Use of a Vehicle’ under the Road Traffic Act following the CJEU ‘Vnuk’ judgement appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
See the results of our Brief Brexit Survey https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/see-results-brief-brexit-survey/ Thu, 05 Oct 2017 15:03:09 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=28070 2017-09-26-Survey-Monkey-Responses-Brexit

The post See the results of our Brief Brexit Survey appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
2017-09-26-Survey-Monkey-Responses-Brexit

The post See the results of our Brief Brexit Survey appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
ABI Trade Credit Insurance Guide https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/abi-trade-credit-insurance-guide/ Wed, 24 May 2017 14:56:52 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=27277 The post ABI Trade Credit Insurance Guide appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The post ABI Trade Credit Insurance Guide appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Aggregation within Solicitor’s PI and possible implications to the wider PI market https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/aggregation-within-solicitors-pi-possible-implications-wider-pi-market/ Thu, 18 May 2017 13:46:46 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=27197 Supreme Court Case judgement on ‘aggregation’ within Solicitor’s PI AIG Europe v Woodman  The Supreme Court recently reached its long-awaited judgement in the AIG v

The post Aggregation within Solicitor’s PI and possible implications to the wider PI market appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Supreme Court Case judgement on ‘aggregation’ within Solicitor’s PI

AIG Europe v Woodman 

The Supreme Court recently reached its long-awaited judgement in the AIG v Woodman case, with it creating more certainty surrounding the application of ‘aggregation’ within Solicitors Professional Indemnity (PI) insurance.  To arrive at its decision, the Court fully scrutinised the aggregation wording within the minimum terms and conditions (MTCs) of the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) which limits cover to one claim for “all claims arising from the same or similar acts or omission in a series of related matters or transactions…”.  It is yet to be seen whether this judgement will have any material impact on either the solicitors or the wider PI market.

The solicitor had advised on the development of two holiday resorts in Turkey and Morocco which were being financed by private investors.  One of its duties was to advance funds from the investors for the purchase of land but this money was released to the developer before adequate security had been put in place and the developer collapsed financially before the land was purchased.  The investors, totalling more than 200, sought recompense from the solicitor and their PI insurers, AIG, with the insurer arguing that all claims should be aggregated into one under the MTCs, limiting their exposure to the £3m limit of indemnity rather than the total amount sought by the investors, being more than £10m.

Their argument was rejected by the Commercial Court and Court of Appeal, but they then referred it to the Supreme Court, who took a much more simplistic view in interpreting ‘aggregation’ within the MTCs, deciding that claims merely had to have some inter-connection between transactions rather than an intrinsic relationship.  The same Court decided that, as the two projects were separate and unconnected, they could not be aggregated together so there would be two separate £3m claims, but this was still a very good result for the insurer.  It is worth pointing out that the benefit of aggregation could be the other way when multiple excesses could be due from a policyholder.

Although it seems to be an important judgement it possibly only reinforces the interpretation of policy coverage that many PI insurers would have assumed, and wanted, to be the case already.  For this reason it is unlikely to have a dramatic impact on the solicitors PI market in the short-term.  It could also be questioned as to how much of an impact this will have on the wider PI market as the determination of aggregation will always depend on both the facts of the case and the specific wording of each policy, but it could of course prove influential.  One change that is more likely is some PI insurers looking to tighten their wordings around aggregation to minimise their exposures as even small wording differences can have a large influence how the Courts interpret the operation of cover.

The very nature of legal services create an environment where a ‘series of related transactions’ (and therefore the potential for aggregation) is more prevalent than most professions though the others most likely to be affected in a similar way are surveyors and possibly also IFAs and insurance brokers.  As well as the long-standing risk of a rogue or insufficiently trained/supervised employee, there has been a huge increase in the prevalence of online trading and its associated risks.  Many brokers also now have binding authorities in place with the ability to quote rates, bind cover, produce policy documentation and even manage and settle claims, and each layer of authority carries with it an inherent risk of an error or omission being repeated multiple times.  Added to this are the increasing variety of distribution channels of insurance products, often via wholesale brokers and MGAs, and these can create a less transparent and more dangerous broking environment than the traditional model.

In the current competitive environment, where insurers are under significant pressures with underwriting returns and competition between brokers and against direct business is fierce, a shorter-term approach can manifest which enhances fluctuations in market appetite and business being moved more frequently.  This presents inherent dangers for brokers who may have to change the underwriters who support a particular scheme or transfer a book of business.

Although the dangers of aggregation may not be quite as prevalent as with solicitors, insurance brokers do have potential exposures and should always continue to face these risks in a cautious and risk aware manner to avoid ever finding themselves in the same position as the solicitor firm in this case.  It would certainly be prudent for brokers to check their own PI insurance for how it deals with aggregation and this highlights the ever increasing importance of choosing a quality insurer with a long-term approach and reputation for supporting insureds when claims are notified.

With thanks to Matt MacLaren, Griffiths & Armour Professional Risks. A BIBA Accredited PI Broker.

The post Aggregation within Solicitor’s PI and possible implications to the wider PI market appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The Discount Rate Change and Limits of Indemnity https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/discount-rate-change-limits-indemnity/ Fri, 05 May 2017 15:20:49 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26858 We provided an update on the change in the discount rate from 2.5% to -0.75% on 28/2/2017 – click here > The Government have now

The post The Discount Rate Change and Limits of Indemnity appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
We provided an update on the change in the discount rate from 2.5% to -0.75% on 28/2/2017 – click here >

The Government have now issued a Consultation paper ‘Personal injury discount rate: how it should be set in future’ which closes on 11 May 2017 click here > to which BIBA will be providing a response highlighting the impact on insurers’ reserves, the likely increase in insurance premiums and the potential for underinsurance in liability limits..

The consequence of the change in discount rate has resulted in significant increases in insurers’ claims reserves on current policies for catastrophic personal injury – Willis Towers Watson, the global advisory firm, estimates the impact of the change on insurers as a material one-off reserve charge of approximately £5.8 billion.  BIBA attended an industry stakeholder meeting to discuss the consultation and a case was highlighted for an SME business whereby a claim reserve for a personal injury on a public liability policy was increased from £8million to £15million, due to the change in the Discount Rate.  The SME purchased a limit of £10million and the likely consequences will be the bankruptcy of the SME.

Publically available information on Public and Employers’ Liability injury claims is limited, but we have been advised of the following incidents –

  • PL claim – child severely injured by vehicle on construction site, contractor responsible for traffic management found to be negligent. Claim reserved at £9million originally, following change in discount rate reserve now increased to £20million.
  • PL claim – child injured by falling bough from a tree in park. Claim settled prior to discount rate change at £5million within the primary PL limit – claim would have been significantly higher post discount rate change.
  • PL claim – property owner’s policy – tenant fell down external stairs of building suffering severe injury. Claim reserved at £4.5million originally, following change in discount rate reserve now increased to £6.5million.
  • EL claim – Claimant aged 19 at accident causing tetraplegia. Reserve originally £9million, increased to £20.1million following discount rate change.  EL limit of indemnity £10million.
  • EL claim – Claimant suffered spinal cord injuries leading to complete paraplegia following an accident at work.  Reserve originally £15million, increased to £27.5million following discount rate change.  EL limit of indemnity £10million.

We have seen a number of publically reported high-value motor insurance claims, including –

  • Collier v Norton (click here to see BIBA Legal Supplement) settled at £23million before the change in the discount rate.
  • claim settled on the date that the change in the rates was announced, using the new -0.75% rate settled at £28million, click here
  • Manny Helmot, settled in 2010 at £14million pre discount rate change.
  • Wasim Mohammed, settled in 2010 at £11.15million pre discount rate change.

and also high value medical malpractice claims, including –

  • Maisha Najeeb, settled in 2014 at £24million pre discount rate change.
  • Milly Evans, settled in 2014 at £10.8million pre discount rate change.

Members may wish to consider reviewing liability limits of indemnity with their clients.  Indemnity limits are commonly £10million for Employers’ Liability, and anything from £2million and above for Public and Products liability (although we understand that there are still some e-traded Public Liability policies available with limits of £1million).

BIBA members may wish to consider using BIBA’s Professional Indemnity Initiative Volume 6 ‘Managing Under-Insurance a Guide to Prevention’ in assisting in raising awareness.  Pages 34-39 of the Guide – ‘Liability – special considerations’ – discuss liability limits of indemnity.  Please see a link to the guide here >

In considering limits of indemnity, members may also wish to consider –

  • Property damage and product liability claims may also result in significant losses.
  • The adequacy of limits of indemnity for losses occurring today that may manifest themselves in the future – will the limit of indemnity in place currently be sufficient for claims that may arise in the future? Asbestosis and Mesothelioma claims are being pursued today from exposures many years ago against EL policies with limits of indemnity arranged with limits of indemnity as low as £100,000.
  • We understand that some insurers’ response to the change in the discount rate is to reduce the limits of indemnity that they provide for primary layers.

BIBA have in place a Scheme for members with CNA Hardy for Excess Layer Public, Products and Employers’ Liability, with the ability to underwrite limits up to £20million in excess of the primary limit for organisations with turnover not exceeding £50million.  CNA Hardy can provide short-term or longer terms policies to ensure that their policy falls in line with the primary insurer.  Click here >

The post The Discount Rate Change and Limits of Indemnity appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
BIBA’s response to the DfT Consultation on the ECJ Vnuk Ruling https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/bibas-response-dft-consultation-ecj-vnuk-ruling/ Thu, 13 Apr 2017 08:12:26 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26631 The post BIBA’s response to the DfT Consultation on the ECJ Vnuk Ruling appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The post BIBA’s response to the DfT Consultation on the ECJ Vnuk Ruling appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The Riot Compensation Act 2016 and The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/riot-compensation-act-2016-riot-compensation-regulations-2017/ Thu, 06 Apr 2017 13:37:07 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26585 Technical Update : The Riot Compensation Act 2016 and The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017 Background:- The Riot Compensation Act 2016 repeals the Riot (Damages) Act

The post The Riot Compensation Act 2016 and The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Technical Update : The Riot Compensation Act 2016 and The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017

Background:-

The Riot Compensation Act 2016 repeals the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 which was deemed as being no longer fit for purpose.  The Act is a culmination of an independent review of the Riot (Damages) Act carried out by Neil Kinghan in 2013 and a Government consultation in 2014 which resulted in The Riot Compensation Bill which was introduced to the House of Commons in June, 2015. BIBA met with Neil Kinghan and also responded to the consultation.

The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017 are the result of the Home Office consulting with the police, the ABI and large insurance companies in December, 2016.

Effective Date : Other than Sections 11 and 12 of The Act (which came into force on 23rd March, 2016) both the Act and The Regulations came into force on 6th April, 2017.

Summaries :

The new Act creates a more effective process for both businesses and individuals to claim compensation following damages incurred by riot.

The Act introduces several key changes which: –

  • Allow insurers who have met claims from people or businesses to claim compensation from the local policing body.
  • Allow people and businesses, which are not insured, to claim compensation from the local policing body.
  • Require that the amount of compensation must reflect only the loss directly resulting from the damage, destruction or theft of the property. Consequential loss is not covered.
  • Compensation is capped at £1m on each claim
  • Allows for claims on motor vehicles which are not insured for riot damage, but which are covered by an insurance policy at the time.

The Act also makes provision for the formation of a riot claims bureau and subsequent regulations for changes to the period of time a person or business would have to make a claim.

The definition of ‘riot’ is now in accordance with section 1 of the Public Order Act 1986. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/64

Full details of the Act can be found at : http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/8/contents/enacted/data.htm

The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017 provide for the practical implications of the Riot Compensation Act, 2016,  especially around claims procedures, notably:-

  • Where more than one person has a legal interest in property each person may make a claim under the 2016 Act. No person may make more than one claim in respect of the same postal address.
  • A claim must generally be made within 43 days from the end date of the riot. But in respect of claimants whose insurers have refused to pay the whole or part of a claim, 43 days from the insurers decision. Supporting evidence is to be provided within 91 days.
  • Other than motor vehicles and business stock which are subject to depreciation or valued on a replacement basis replacement is allowed on a new for old basis.
  • If a claimants home has been damaged rendering it uninhabitable claims for alternative accommodation may be made but are limited to a maximum period of 132 days from the date the property was damaged.
  • Claims made by persons taking part in the riot, contributing to damage during the riot or committing a criminal offence relating to the riot may be decreased or refused.

Full details of the Regulations can be found at : http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2017/371/pdfs/uksi_20170371_en.pdf

The post The Riot Compensation Act 2016 and The Riot Compensation Regulations 2017 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
ELTO Broker Guide 2017 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/elto-broker-guide-2017/ Fri, 31 Mar 2017 09:58:31 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26519 The post ELTO Broker Guide 2017 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The post ELTO Broker Guide 2017 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Technical guidance to members, from NAPIT, on demonstrating compliance with the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/technical-guidance-members-napit-demonstrating-compliance-electricity-work-regulations-1989/ Wed, 15 Mar 2017 09:47:18 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26366 1st March 2017 Demonstrating Compliance with the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 Introduction The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 (EAWR) were introduced under the Health

The post Technical guidance to members, from NAPIT, on demonstrating compliance with the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
1st March 2017

Demonstrating Compliance with the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989

Introduction

The Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 (EAWR) were introduced under the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 (the HSW Act) and is the primary legislation concerning the safety of electrical systems and equipment in the workplace.

Like the HSW Act, the EAWR applies principally to employers, employees and the self-employed. Duties are imposed on people (called, ‘Duty Holders’) according to their level of responsibility within the company.

It is important that people recognise their responsibilities under the EAWR. The penalties for non-compliance are daunting. Failure to discharge a duty can result in an unlimited fine, imprisonment of up to two years or both.

This article will consider the duties imposed by the EAWR.

‘Reasonably practicable’ and ‘absolute’                                                            

The term ‘reasonably practicable’ is used in connection with some duties in the EAWR. Where this term is absent, the requirement is said to be, ‘absolute’, which means that it must be met regardless of cost or any other consideration.

The phrase, ‘reasonably practicable’ means the risk must be balanced against the measures needed to control the risk in terms of money, time or trouble.

Primary Electrical Duty Holders

Employers, directors and managers etc. are classed as, Primary Electrical Duty Holders and their responsibilities can be summarised simply as the need to ensure:

  • safe procedures
  • safe places
  • safe people

If an accident is judged to be attributable to the negligence of a Primary Electrical Duty Holder, that person is liable to prosecution in addition to the company.

Some of the duties in the EAWR are non-technical but other duties require technical knowledge. Primary Electrical Duty Holders may appoint additional Duty Holders, such as a Duty Holder (Electrical).

Responsibilities of the Duty Holder (Electrical)

The Duty Holder (Electrical) must be able to ask and answer the following questions:

  1. Do I know the risks arising from our activities?
  2. Do I know how to eliminate, control or reduce them?
  3. Do I communicate the above information through my company or organisation?
  4. Do I know that staff are complying with those measures?

If the Duty Holder (Electrical) is unsure of the answers to any of these questions, he or she will need to:

For new premises…

  • Carry out a Risk Assessment and formalise any new systems of work into safe working procedures
  • Include in your procedures, where necessary, the use of ‘Permits to work’ coupled with physical lock-off systems where appropriate
  • Inform and train your staff along with any external contractors you employ
  • Provide regular informal group discussions on safe working practices and procedures
  • Observe all parts of the  procedure,    modify if necessary, and continue to monitor

When revisiting existing premises…

  • Confirm that the risk assessment of working practices, environment and equipment is still valid
  • Determine what can be done to remove any identified hazards and then address them
  • Should unavoidable hazards remain, develop a safe system of work

Reducing risk

One way in which risks of non-compliance can be reduced is by the use of external specialists to provide an Electrical Compliance Inspection Service.

One example of such a service is that jointly offered by NAPIT and Travelers, one of the world’s leading insurance companies, to their policyholders. This service is completed by a NAPIT Inspector who will assess three areas; Safe Systems of Work, Safe Place of Work and Safe People at Work. This involves looking in detail into a number of areas, such as, the presence of risk assessments, safe working procedures, staff competence, qualifications and training records, procedures for safe isolation, adequate maintenance records including, programmes of works for undertaking Electrical Installation Condition Reports (EICR) and Portable Appliance Testing (PAT), and procedures for the rectification of identified faults.

Demonstrating compliance with the EAWR

In any proceedings for contravention of the EAWR, a person must be able to prove that he or she took all reasonable steps and exercised all due diligence to avoid the commission of that offence.

By having a comprehensive Electrical Compliance Inspection of your electrical system and procedures and documentation completed by an experienced Inspector, you will have clearly demonstrated your commitment to complying with the EAWR.

Contact details:

info@napit.org.uk

Tel: 0345 543 0330

www.napit.org.uk

Follow us on Twitter: @OfficialNAPIT

Like us on Facebook:  www.facebook.com/OfficialNAPIT

The post Technical guidance to members, from NAPIT, on demonstrating compliance with the Electricity at Work Regulations 1989 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Discount Rate Review – Reduction to -0.75% https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/discount-rate-review-reduction-0-75/ Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:39:41 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26306 The Lord Chancellor has announced (27/2/2017) a reduction in the personal injury Discount Rate from 2.5% to -0.75% and will be effective from 20th March

The post Discount Rate Review – Reduction to -0.75% appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The Lord Chancellor has announced (27/2/2017) a reduction in the personal injury Discount Rate from 2.5% to -0.75% and will be effective from 20th March 2017.

The Rate change is based on a three year average of returns on Government index linked Gilts.

This will mean that insurers, when settling claims to claimants with catastrophic personal injuries, will be required to pay increased compensation sums.  Claimants with long life expectancies may expect lump sum awards increased by 50%, or even higher depending on circumstances, when the new rate comes into effect.

The reduction in the Rate will likely have a substantial impact on motor and liability insurance premiums for both consumers and business.

In announcing the change the Lord Chancellor accepted that the reduction will have ‘significant implications across the public and private sector’, but went on to say ‘the law is absolutely clear – as Lord Chancellor, I must make sure the right rate is set to compensate claimants.  I am clear that this is the only legally acceptable rate I can set.’

A further consultation, to be issued before Easter 2017, on the Discount Rate was also announced  to consider options for reform including whether an independent body should set the rate in future, whether there should be more frequent reviews and whether the methodology of assuming claimants will only invest in Government Gilts is appropriate.

The post Discount Rate Review – Reduction to -0.75% appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Discount Rate https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/discount-rate/ Fri, 10 Feb 2017 16:21:58 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=26205 The Discount Rate is used in calculating settlements in catastrophic personal injury claims to ensure that the claimant is neither over nor under compensated. The

The post Discount Rate appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The Discount Rate is used in calculating settlements in catastrophic personal injury claims to ensure that the claimant is neither over nor under compensated.

The Discount Rate is applied by insurers to make a settlement based on an allowance for the return that a claimant might expect to receive if a lump sum compensation award is invested prudently.  Government index-linked gilts are used to determine the rate applied.

The Discount Rate was set at 2.5% in 2001 and has not been revised despite change in economic conditions, reduced interest rates and despite two Government consultations on the matter.

The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) recently announced a review and expects to announce the new rate by the end of February 2017.  The Association of British Insurers (ABI) sought to bring a Judicial Review, calling on a the Government to complete its consultation before announcing the new rate, but this proved to be unsuccessful and the ABI were refused a right of appeal.

There is much speculation as to how much the revised Discount Rate will be reduced by, with some observers even suggesting that a negative discount rate is justified taking into account the changes in investment returns, tax rates and inflation since 2001.

Any reduction in the rate will result in higher claims awards and therefore have a significant impact on insurers’ balance sheets, with some suggestion that it will cost the insurance industry billions of pounds.

This will, inevitably, mean significant premium increases in motor and liability insurance classes, particularly in sectors such as young drivers and commercial motor.

Many insurers have been strengthening their reserves and seeking more capital, however some commentators suggest that this has the possibility to see insurers exiting the insurance  the motor and liability markets wherethey are unable to deal with the impact of any change in the Discount Rate.

The impact will not only fall on the insurance industry, but any sector that provides compensation including the NHS, Local Authorities and Public Bodies.

We will issue a further update once the outcome of the MOJ review is known.

The post Discount Rate appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Graham Terrell and Ben Margetson to head up BIBA’s Liability and Accident Committee https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/graham-terrell-ben-margetson-head-bibas-liability-accident-committee/ Wed, 14 Dec 2016 11:06:49 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25731 Graham Terrell, Partner at JLT Specialty has been appointed Chairman of the British Insurance Brokers’ Association’s (BIBA) Liability and Accident Committee. Graham, who was previously

The post Graham Terrell and Ben Margetson to head up BIBA’s Liability and Accident Committee appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Graham Terrell, Partner at JLT Specialty has been appointed Chairman of the British Insurance Brokers’ Association’s (BIBA) Liability and Accident Committee. Graham, who was previously the Deputy Chairman, replaces Peter Franklin who will remain on the committee.

Ben Margetson, Regional Client Service Director at Marsh has taken the role of Deputy Chairman. He has been a member of the committee since 2008.

Graham said: “BIBA plays a pivotal role in representing the interests of the insurance market and their customers, and I am delighted to be taking on such a significant role within the committee which makes such an important contribution to the insurance industry.”

Ben commented: “The pace of technological and legislative change means brokers and insurers need to continually ensure liability wordings are fit for purpose, on their clients’ behalf. I look forward to working with BIBA’s Liability and Accident Committee, which provides a vital forum to help the industry meet the challenges associated with this change.”

The Committee represents BIBA members’ interests.  It discusses and handles problems and other topical issues relating to liability insurance.  Meeting regularly throughout the year, committee members also contribute to the technical work of BIBA on all liability insurance matters.

Mike Hallam, BIBA’s Head of Technical Services, added: “We are pleased to have experienced and respected brokers Graham and Ben step into these senior roles. Recent agenda items for the Liability and Accident Committee have included VNUK,  products liability for autonomous vehicles, the Insurance Act, ELTO as well as case law and ongoing claims issues. We are also most grateful to Peter for his leadership and his expert knowledge and are pleased that he is to remain on the committee.”

-ENDS-

Notes to editors

  1. Photos available on request.
  2. For further information please contact:BIBA press office:
    Pam Quinn, Head of Communications
    020 7397 0223
    quinnp@biba.org.uk

Leighann Forsyth; Deputy Head of Communications
020 7397 0223
forsythl@biba.org.uk

 

  1. About the British Insurance Brokers’ Association

The British Insurance Brokers’ Association (BIBA) is the UK’s leading general insurance intermediary organisation representing the interests of insurance brokers, intermediaries and their customers.

BIBA membership includes just under 2,000 regulated firms.

General insurance brokers contribute 1% of GDP to the UK economy and BIBA brokers employ more than 100,000 staff.

54% of all general insurance is sold by an insurance broker and they arrange 78% of all commercial insurance business.

Insurance brokers put the client’s interests first, providing advice, access to suitable insurance protection and risk management.

BIBA helps more than 250,000 people a year to access insurance protection through its Find a Broker service, both online and via the telephone.

BIBA is the voice of the sector advising members, the regulators, consumer bodies and other stakeholders on key insurance issues.

The post Graham Terrell and Ben Margetson to head up BIBA’s Liability and Accident Committee appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Important information about Gable – policies will expire in December https://www.biba.org.uk/latest-news/gable-in-liquidation/ Tue, 22 Nov 2016 17:06:50 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25459 The FSCS has advised that Gable Insurance AG is in default – details can be found on the FSCS website The FSCS protects individuals and

The post Important information about Gable – policies will expire in December appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
The FSCS has advised that Gable Insurance AG is in default – details can be found on the FSCS website

The FSCS protects individuals and small businesses to 90% of the value of a claim or 100% for certain risks such as accident/injury/professional indemnity, and all policyholder to 100% for certain compulsory insurances including employers’ liability and third party motor insurance. For an EEA insurer such as Gable, they protection is for UK risks only.

The FCA has also announced that under Liechtenstein Insurance Contract Law, four weeks after Gable’s liquidation was made public their insurance contracts will automatically expire and no longer be valid. It is expected that Gable’s insurance policies will expire on 16 December 2016 as confirmed on the FCA website

We would urge all members that have policies in place with Gable Insurance AG to contact their clients as a matter of urgency with a view to replacing cover.

The post Important information about Gable – policies will expire in December appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Stay Safe Electrically – NICEIC https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/stay-safe-electrically-niceic/ Tue, 08 Nov 2016 12:08:21 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25304 Risk management is one of the value-adds that a broker can offer and understanding electrical installation rules is another way that clients can be helped. Paul

The post Stay Safe Electrically – NICEIC appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Risk management is one of the value-adds that a broker can offer and understanding electrical installation rules is another way that clients can be helped. Paul Collins, Communications Manager from NICEIC explains all, click here.

 

 

The post Stay Safe Electrically – NICEIC appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest 7/7/2016 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/liability-accident-committee-meeting-digest-772016/ Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:22:06 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25121 EU Referendum The committee discussed the issues in the market following the result of the referendum including the importance of access to the EU market

The post Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest 7/7/2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
EU Referendum

The committee discussed the issues in the market following the result of the referendum including the importance of access to the EU market for the insurance industry.  BIBA would be working with all stakeholders to gauge opinion and form a Manifesto position for 2017.

Case Law

The committee discussed and reviewed the following cases –

Kennedy v Cordia Services – employer found negligent for case when carer, with inadequate footwear, slipped on snow when visiting a client’s house.

Campbell v Gordon – Appellant tried to sue Gordon who was the director of a joiners.  Appellant had suffered injury whilst using an electric saw, but the EL policy had an exclusion of use of woodworking equipment, so claim was unsuccessful to EL insurer.  Supreme Court held, narrowly, that director does not have a civil liability for arranging incorrect EL cover.

VNUK 

The committee were advised that the Department for Transport (DfT) were receiving Francovich claims as a result of the Vnuk case.  BIBA understand a DfT consultation will be issued soon.

BIBA have written directly to Lord Hill, the EU commissioner, and he is supportive of our position.

ELTO

BIBA sit on the ELTO board and ELTO have raised the question as to whether they should consider creating an equivalent database for Public Liability.

The committee felt that there is an extra level of complexity, compared with EL, given the differing triggers in PL wordings.

BIBA will ask the ELTO Advisory Board the rationale behind this request

The post Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest 7/7/2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest – 22 March 2016 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/liability/liability-accident-committee-meeting-digest-22-march-2016/ Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:20:39 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25119 Case Law The committee discussed and reviewed the asbestos case of Heneghan v Manchester Dry Docks in relation to apportionment of damages and the case

The post Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest – 22 March 2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Case Law

The committee discussed and reviewed the asbestos case of Heneghan v Manchester Dry Docks in relation to apportionment of damages and the case of Mohammed v WM Morrison Supermarkets in relation to vicarious liability.

VNUK

The committee were advised that the Department for Transport (DfT) were receiving Francovich claims as a result of the Vnuk case.  BIBA understand a DfT consultation will be issued soon.

BIBA have written directly to Lord Hill, the EU commissioner, and he is supportive of our position.

Under-insurance Guide, Insurance Act Guide and Technical Roadshow

The Under-insurance guide was in a draft format and the committee were thanked for their input.

The Insurance Act implementation guide was in the course of being written in conjunction with Mactavish and will be launched at the 2016 conference, with a series of technical roadshows on the Act to follow.

Any Other Business

A query was raised in relation to the FSCS and an engineering firm that had been nationalised – it was confirmed that the FSCS did not apply pre-1972.

Committee feedback to the ELTO advisory board was requested.

A discussion was held in relation to the recent issues surrounding tumble dryer fires covered in the press.

The post Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest – 22 March 2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest 3/12/2015 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/liability-accident-committee-meeting-digest-3122015/ Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:15:57 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25114 Case Law The committee discussed and reviewed an Australian asbestos case where the illness manifested itself 5 to 10 years after diagnosis. Lydia Graves v

The post Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest 3/12/2015 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Case Law

The committee discussed and reviewed an Australian asbestos case where the illness manifested itself 5 to 10 years after diagnosis.

Lydia Graves v Marinus Gerardus Brouwer (2015) was also discussed in relation to causation.

VNUK

The committee were advised that EU Commissioner Lord Hill’s office were reviewing the case and there may possibly be a slight change to the EU Motor Directive to minimise the impact, possibly in relation to vehicles used in traffic which would largely alleviate UK concerns and deal with the Motor Sport issue.

Changes to Sentencing Guidelines for Health & Safety Offences

The chairman reported on these changes which come into effect in 2016 which will result in a substantial increase in fines and associated legal costs.  The chair agreed to issue a technical briefing for members.

Any Other Business

The 2016 BIBA Manifesto ‘Fairness for All’ was discussed together with the new BIBA guides being planned on under-insurance and an Insurance Act implementation guide.

The post Liability & Accident Committee Meeting Digest 3/12/2015 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Property Committee Meeting Digest – 13 July 2016 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/property-committee-meeting-digest-13-july-2016/ Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:13:49 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25112 FloodRe The committee discussed the DEFRA report and felt insufficient people had been surveyed and there was concern about FloodRe availability in the broker market.

The post Property Committee Meeting Digest – 13 July 2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
FloodRe

The committee discussed the DEFRA report and felt insufficient people had been surveyed and there was concern about FloodRe availability in the broker market.

Software houses feedback on progress to FloodRe access was discussed.

Brexit

BIBA have produced a document on the issues that the industry faces and highlighting the importance of access to the EU market.

Under-insurance Guide

BIBA has produced three guides on this topic, a main guide, mini guide and customer facing guide which were distributed to the committee and will be made available to all members.

Any Other Business

The new Riot Compensation Act 2016 was discussed, along with the court case of Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime v Mitsui Sumitomo 2016 where the Supreme Court ruled that insurer’s losses for business interruption claims, following damage to the Sony warehouse in the 2011 London riots, were not recoverable under the Riot (Damages) Act 1886.

Insurance Act Presentation

David Hertzell, the former law commissioner, and consultant to Mactavish gave a presentation to the committee on the Act, followed by a lively discussion.

 

 

The post Property Committee Meeting Digest – 13 July 2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Property Committee Meeting Digest 9/3/2016 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/property-committee-meeting-digest-932016/ Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:12:51 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25110 DEFRA Flood Survey The survey had now been issued – 25,000 small businesses unable to access flood cover.  DEFRA were looking to repeat the survey. 

The post Property Committee Meeting Digest 9/3/2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
DEFRA Flood Survey

The survey had now been issued – 25,000 small businesses unable to access flood cover.  DEFRA were looking to repeat the survey.  BIBA are seeking a commercial solution for flood risk properties.

Insurance Act 2015

BIBA are working on issuing an Implementation Guide, including a smaller guide for the customer.  The committee reiterated that it was hoped that insurers and brokers would work together to provide some clarity when the Act comes into force.

The question of convictions spent under the Rehabilitation Act was discussed in relation to the Act and also declaration-linked (non-average) Business Interruption in relation to proportionate remedies.

Insurance Provision in Finance Agreements

The Loan Market Association (LMA) had produced a standard broker letter which is a significant burden on insurance brokers – the letter is often produced at the last minute, cover needs to be agreed with insurers and very often the letter is in a different format.

It was agreed that a sub-committee would look to meet with the British Bankers Association and the British Property Federation and frame a response to the LMA’s letter.

Reporting Mandates

BIBA was looking to re-engage with the ABI to ensure the standard format remains fit for purpose and also look to engage with the Managing General Agents Association.

ABI/BIBA Vulnerable Customer Code

BIBA and the ABI were working together to produce a code.  BIBA would also ensure that a brokerASSESS module was available for staff training on the code.

Index-Linking of Sums Insured

The approach by insurers varies, but coupled with the rise in IPT resulted in a 9%-10% increase in property premiums.

Terrorism Insurance on Household

In response to a member query the committee view was that this was a standard exclusion, other than some high-net worth policies, and the Government would be the compensator.  There is also a commercial solution available in the market.

 

 

The post Property Committee Meeting Digest 9/3/2016 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Property Committee Meeting Digest – 25 November 2015 https://www.biba.org.uk/technical-updates/property-committee-meeting-digest-25-november-2015/ Fri, 30 Sep 2016 15:11:31 +0000 https://www.biba.org.uk/?p=25108 Insurance Act 2015 The committee discussed some insurers ‘early’ adoption of the Act and the view was that there were a number of inconsistencies in

The post Property Committee Meeting Digest – 25 November 2015 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>
Insurance Act 2015

The committee discussed some insurers ‘early’ adoption of the Act and the view was that there were a number of inconsistencies in insurers approach and it was hoped that insurers and brokers would work together to provide some clarity when the Act comes into force.

Loan Market Agreements

The Loan Market Association (LMA) were looking to produce a standard broker letter which is a significant burden on insurance brokers – currently finance institutions issue their letter at the last minute, cover needs to be agreed with insurers and very often the letter is in a different formats.

It was agreed that a sub-committee would look to meet with the British Bankers Association and the British Property Federation.

Reporting Mandates

BIBA was looking to re-engage with the ABI to ensure the standard format remains fit for purpose and also look to engage with the Managing General Agents Association (MGAA).

ABI/BIBA Vulnerable Customer Code

BIBA and the ABI were working together to produce a code.  BIBA would also ensure that a brokerASSESS module was available for staff training on the code.

Index-Linking of Sums Insured

The approach by insurers varies, but coupled with the rise in IPT resulted in a 9%-10% increase in property premiums.

Terrorism Insurance on Household

In response to a member query the committee view was that this was a standard exclusion, other than some high-net worth policies, and the Government would be the compensator.  There is also a commercial solution available in the market.

The post Property Committee Meeting Digest – 25 November 2015 appeared first on British Insurance Brokers' Association.

]]>