Actuarial Outpost > CAS last problem
 Register Blogs Wiki FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
 FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

 Life Actuarial Jobs& Annuities,& Investments Worldwide Salary SurveysLife & HealthPension Property & Casualty DW Simpson & Co.Actuarial Recruitment Worldwide Casualty Jobs& Property -- WorldwideReinsurance,Insurance, Bureaus & Consulting

#1
11-04-2005, 08:31 AM
 A-Head Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 117
last problem

Was this the problem with the LDD policy with a \$X per accident limit and \$2,500,000 aggregate limit? They also gave the limited expected losses of \$1,000,000 and expected unlimited losses of \$1,500,000 (I think this was all there).

I took the excess losses of \$500,000 and added the insurance charge of \$1,000,000xTable M charge at entry ratio 2.5 and whatever ELG I came up with. Anyone else remember this at all?
#2
11-04-2005, 08:45 AM
 HankMorgan CAS Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: NIMBY Posts: 5

I think this was a Fisher problem. I got a charge of 55,000, but also added 500,000 for the expected per claim loss cost (\$1.5m - \$1.0m).

#3
11-04-2005, 09:06 AM
 carenthir_dm Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 73

Yep, \$500k plus the charge, though my charge wasn't \$55k exactly. Entry ratio 2.5 is right, and I got loss group 25, which put the table M factor at 0.03629, or something like that.
#4
11-04-2005, 09:17 AM
 KindGrind Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 138

I think I got ELG = 23....

I got 2.5, too.

LUGS = 1 500 000 * 1.2 * (1 + 0.8 (500 / 1500))/(1-500/1500)

I wasnt sure about the LER...I would have guessed 1000 / 1500 intuitively, but it was giving me ELG 19 which is not onn the table

I think I got something around 525 000 or something
#5
11-04-2005, 09:22 AM
 by234 Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 14

I think the group difference is due to the tables (with different effective date) used to look up the ELG. Based on the latest one, I believe the ELG is 25.
#6
11-04-2005, 10:02 AM
 GefilteFish144 Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: New York Posts: 4,322

25 sounds right to me. It was the same one in that retro rating insurance charge question, so I had already marked the column in the manual.
#7
11-04-2005, 10:03 AM
 ed999 Member CAS AAA Join Date: May 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 1,034

yes. i think i got 536.29 K
#8
11-04-2005, 10:06 AM
 KindGrind Member Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 138

is something wrong with my LUGS calculation?

I get LUGS = 3 420 000. Anyone has the table? What is the ELG for 3 420 000?
#9
11-04-2005, 10:23 AM
 Avi Wiki ContributorSite Supporter Site Supporter CAS AAA Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: NY Studying for the rest of my life. College: Alumnus - Queens College - CUNY Favorite beer: Stone Ruination IPA Posts: 12,506 Blog Entries: 3

I somehow recall Group 25, and an answer of around 551K.
__________________
All scientists defer only to physicists
Physicists defer only to mathematicians
Mathematicians defer only to G-d!

--with apologies to Dr. Leon Lederman
#10
11-04-2005, 10:28 AM
 ed999 Member CAS AAA Join Date: May 2002 Location: NYC Posts: 1,034

I also got .03629 as the charge, and then did " .03629*1000K + 500K " to get 536.3

 Thread Tools Display Modes Linear Mode

 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 03:59 AM.

 -- Default Style - Fluid Width ---- Default Style - Fixed Width ---- Old Default Style ---- Easy on the eyes ---- Smooth Darkness ---- Chestnut ---- Apple-ish Style ---- If Apples were blue ---- If Apples were green ---- If Apples were purple ---- Halloween 2007 ---- B&W ---- Halloween ---- AO Christmas Theme ---- Turkey Day Theme ---- AO 2007 beta ---- 4th Of July Contact Us - Actuarial Outpost - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top