Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > Property - Casualty / General Insurance
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


Fill in a brief DW Simpson Registration Form
to be contacted when new jobs meet your criteria.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-21-2018, 06:18 AM
panning2002 panning2002 is offline
CAS
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 14
Default question about sum insured

I am a bit confused with the definition of sum insured. Basically,

1. is it the same as the policy limit? If a policy covers a variety of risks, each with a separate coverage limit, will the sum insured be the highest of the coverage limits or the sum of each coverage limit?

2. For a proportional reinsurance treaty, how is the treaty sum insured calculated? Sum of the sum insured of each underlying policy?

Many thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-21-2018, 12:08 PM
Beach Bum Beach Bum is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Currently away from an Ocean
Favorite beer: Alpha King
Posts: 1,958
Default

I see /use it synonymous with total insured values (TIV). If you insure a building with $10M in building value, $1M in contents, $1M in business interruption, you'd have $13M in TIV.

Sum insured would take this exposure value and apply it against all locations in your portfolio.

If using it for GL purposes it can be a bit misleading. Say you write a bunch of $1M per occurrence GL limits, one could simply take # of policies times $1M to get sum insured (or total exposures). However, this doesn't differentiate between writing a bunch of small accounts or a bunch of large commercial accounts. The example above with property does actually tell you the in-force exposure.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-21-2018, 12:39 PM
DeepPurple's Avatar
DeepPurple DeepPurple is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,246
Default

1) No it is not. TIV means all the exposure added up, at least on paper. TIV is not the policy limit. A loss may exceed a policy limit. Homeowners is a good example. A house is insured at a policy limit of $200,000. The policy also gives coverage for appurtenant structures of 10% (20,000) contents of 80% (160,000) and additional living expenses (10%) for a TIV of $400,000. So seeing a total loss at 200% of policy face value is a possibility.


2) The question doesn't really make sense. TIV is not a relevant to proportional treaty transactions. But you can calculate TIV by just summing all the policy limits.


The vast majority of proportional treaties are quota shares. Sums insured is not relevant to any calculation. The reinsurer gets a contractual portion of the premium and pays the same percentage of a losses. Say it is a 50% quota share. The reinsurer gets 50% of the premiums, and pays 50% of the losses, without regard to TIV. A policy could be 20 thousand or 20 million. Reinsurer gets half and half.

Surplus share proportional reinsurance (technically still a thing but pretty uncommon) has the proportion of sharing for each individual policy defined by the policy limit of that policy. Then the premiums and losses for each individual policy is shared proportionally as stated in the treaty. Do you need further examples?
__________________
Come on. Let's go space truckin'. Come on!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:05 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.14714 seconds with 11 queries