Schedule F, Part 4 (Aging of Reinsurance)

[roseberykebab]

Am I correct in that Reinsurance Recoverables in Dispute do show up in Schedule F, Part 4?

[Tim_Boles]

Am I correct in that Reinsurance Recoverables in Dispute do show up in Schedule F, Part 4?

Yes, that's correct.

Tim

[cubsfan]

Yes, that's correct.

Tim

I disagree. From the schedule F I am looking at, Part 4 appears to include amounts in dispute.

If I look at Part 6 columns 4 + 9, those add up to Part 4 columns 8 + 9.

[triplea]

I think that's what he was agreeing with ;)

[Tim_Boles]

I disagree. From the schedule F I am looking at, Part 4 appears to include amounts in dispute.

If I look at Part 6 columns 4 + 9, those add up to Part 4 columns 8 + 9.

Actually, I think you mean that you agree. We're all saying that Part 4 includes amounts in dispute.

Tim

[cubsfan]

Actually, I think you mean that you agree. We're all saying that Part 4 includes amounts in dispute.

Tim

Yeah you are definitely right. I thought rose said do not show up.

[Cards Fan]

All - I asked Feldblum this exact question at seminar and he told me that amounts in dispute are NOT included in the aging schedule. I can't confirm your guys' statments above because my company doesn't show any amounts in dispute in Schedule F. Just wanted to figure out what is going on with this. Thanks.

[cubsfan]

All - I asked Feldblum this exact question at seminar and he told me that amounts in dispute are NOT included in the aging schedule. I can't confirm your guys' statments above because my company doesn't show any amounts in dispute in Schedule F. Just wanted to figure out what is going on with this. Thanks.

Figures.

[VandelayIndustries]

I hate feldblum.

[CaffeineJunky]

Part 4 definitely includes amounts in dispute. Just for fun:exams:, take your company schedule F and find an authorized reinsurer who has overdue and amounts in dispute on part 6, and reconcile that with the same reinsurer on part 4. Notice that part 6 has a column, (9) "Amts in dispute excluded from column 4". Now add column 4 from part 6 (Overdue not in dispute) with column 9 from part 6 (amt in dispute excluded from overdue) and the sum will be the total overdue amount from part 4.

[Wolfy]

That's unbelievable that Feldblum would tell the whole seminar something that is obviously wrong. If he doesn't know he should just say so

[VandelayIndustries]

I borrowed a copy of the detailed annual statement instructions from the May 2008 Booke Seminar (the nationally recognized leader in providing relevant continuing professional education to insurance industry accounting and financial reporting professionals:http://www.bookeseminars.com/seminars) from my company's reinsurance accounting area, and the Sched F part 4 instructions state, clear as day:

"Disputed amounts should be reported here if the insurer is reporting the recoverable as an admitted asset."

What should not be reported is:
"amounts written off as uncollectible or designated as nonadmitted assets ... (and) ... recoverable amounts in dispute with an affiliate."

it goes on:
"Those unauthorized reinsures for whom the insurer reports amounts in the "91-120 Day" or the "Over 120 days" columns should appear in Schedule F -Part 5, column 13 excluding the disputed items reported in footnote 2 to part 5. Those authorized reinsurers for whom the insurer reports amounts in the "91-120 Days" or the "Over 120 Days" columns should appear in Schedule F - Part 6, column 4 excluding the disputed amounts reported in footnote (a) to part 6."

All this is on page 12-41 if someone happens to have a copy.

This case is closed ... I'm so done with what feldblum says regarding schedule F.

[Cards Fan]

VandelayIndustries - Don't get too worked up over it. After looking at Feldblum's papers and seminar notes it's obvious he makes a ton of mistakes. I appreciate your guys' feedback on this stuff, it helps.

[VandelayIndustries]

After looking at Feldblum's papers and seminar notes it's obvious he makes a ton of mistakes.

I wish more people would get worked up over this. The CAS needs to replace this article. Better sources exist.