Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > CAS > CAS Exams > Exam 5 (new) - Ratemaking/Reserving > Old Part 5 (Ratemaking)
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Registration Form
Be Notified

of New
Actuarial Jobs

D.W. Simpson
& Company

International
Actuarial
Recruiters

www.dwsimpson.com

Australia Jobs
Casualty, Life,
Superannuation,
Health &
Investment

Pension
Actuarial Jobs

Consulting &
Insurers --
Students,
Associates &

Fellows


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-23-2007, 07:46 PM
fav1 fav1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 90
Question Pre-judgement interest in CGL

So Pre-judgement interest in CGL is not subject to limit?

I know in PAP it is subject to limit...

I'm looking at 2006 #16.

Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-23-2007, 10:12 PM
alphaace alphaace is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 1,099
Default

no its not. And its also broken up by contribution by limits. Anyone know if post-judgement is broken up by contribution by limits as well?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-23-2007, 10:39 PM
ReserveRage ReserveRage is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

Where does it say that in the current readings? IF you're refering to the problem in the past couple years where they split Pre-judge interest based on the proportion of indemnity paid by Primary vs. Excess, I don't think that's in the current syllabus.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-23-2007, 11:57 PM
2M's Avatar
2M 2M is offline
Member
2005 Grammy Contest Winner
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 26,637
Default

Interest in settlements is not subject to limits in CGL and yes I do not believe the pro rata thing is in the current reading
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-24-2007, 12:02 AM
ReserveRage ReserveRage is offline
Member
CAS AAA
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 5,403
Default

Where? I'm only talking about PRIMARY vs. EXCESS. Not Primary vs. Primary or XS vs. XS.

This specificalyl comes up in the 2005 or 2006 problem where they split $50k in Pre-judge, 25k/25k between primary and excess coverage.

I think it was 1000k Pri, 300k in defense for Pri, 1000k XS. there was 50k in Prejudge and I assumed Primary would cover entire $50k, but solution has $1325k pri, $1025k xs
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-24-2007, 12:18 AM
2M's Avatar
2M 2M is offline
Member
2005 Grammy Contest Winner
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 26,637
Default

I was agreeing with you the spilit the interest thing doesn't appear to be in the reading
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:35 PM
pokershirt pokershirt is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

I'm probably just confusing myself, but I thought that defense costs were subject to the policy limits for CGL. Did I read this wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:47 PM
dodgers00 dodgers00 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokershirt View Post
I'm probably just confusing myself, but I thought that defense costs were subject to the policy limits for CGL. Did I read this wrong?
I didn't think that CGL defense costs were subject to the policy limits. I only remember reading that Employment Practices Liability defense costs are within the limit.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-25-2007, 10:47 PM
carrytheCrøss carrytheCrøss is offline
Member
CAS
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,761
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pokershirt View Post
I'm probably just confusing myself, but I thought that defense costs were subject to the policy limits for CGL. Did I read this wrong?
I believe you read this wrong. Look at 2006, #2. This clearly indicates that defense costs are paid in addition to limits for CGL. What was being debated was whether there is a syllabus reference that addresses pro-rata sharing of prejudgement interest. It appears that there is not, so 2006, #16 seems to be invalid.

You are probably thinking about how defense costs are handled in certain Professional Liability coverages, though CGL insurance is considered distinct from these coverages.
__________________
a wonderful post
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-25-2007, 11:00 PM
pokershirt pokershirt is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Searching. View Post
I believe you read this wrong. Look at 2006, #2. This clearly indicates that defense costs are paid in addition to limits for CGL. What was being debated was whether there is a syllabus reference that addresses pro-rata sharing of prejudgement interest. It appears that there is not, so 2006, #16 seems to be invalid.

You are probably thinking about how defense costs are handled in certain Professional Liability coverages, though CGL insurance is considered distinct from these coverages.
Thanks for the help. I looked it up and I think it's handled differently if there's coverage under an insured contract and the insured owes for attorney and litigation fees. After that, it then says that defense costs for CGL is in addition of limits.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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 08:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, 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 0.21630 seconds with 7 queries