Axa makes strides in catching fraudsters

Danielle
-
0
Axa makes strides in catching fraudsters

Insurance provider Axa has recently publicised three cases as part of their crackdown on would-be fraudsters. All attempted to defraud the company by staging road traffic accidents or exaggerating how severe their accidents were.

In each case, solid evidence was gathered that proved the claimants to be blatantly dishonest, and could have cost Axa £60,000 if they weren’t challenged.

Let’s take a look at each case, as all three are great examples of how insurance providers are eager for evidence to prove fundamental dishonesty when potentially fraudulent claims are made.

Anamaria Coscotin and Others v. Axa Insurance UK

This case involved a road traffic accident that insurers suspected had been staged in an attempt to defraud them. While initial CCTV evidence couldn’t prove that conclusively, a further investigation proffered additional video evidence that showed both vehicles involved attempting to stage an accident.

Five minutes after that video was captured, they were successful in their staged accident attempt. When the evidence was found, the claimant attempted to discontinue her claim a week before the trial, but Axa pushed for the hearing and sought permission to have costs enforced.

Incidentally, the claimant failed to appear in court and was found by a Judge to be fundamentally dishonest. Costs were awarded to Axa.

Mohammed Shafiq v. Mushtaq Ahmed and AXA Insurance UK

This case also involved a road traffic accident that was extremely minor – barely a touch. Accordingly, when Axa began to suspect that something was amiss, they obtained a joint forensic report regarding the alleged damage that was caused.

The report was published, and both experts agreed what was presented by the claimant was completely inconsistent with the evidence. The claimant’s solicitors, who continually purported him to be credible, then attempted to make what’s known as a “drop hands offer,” but Axa denied their request and proceeded to trial.

In court, despite his solicitors vouching for his credibility, the claimant changed his story several times and was proved to be an opportunist who exploited a very minor incident in the hope of collecting a profit.

Artur Skuzu and Anthony Harris v. Axa Insurance UK

When a whiplash claim was made against the driver of an HGV who had Axa insurance, the company suspected that there was more to the story. Thankfully, the incident that had apparently caused the whiplash was recorded on the insured’s dashcam. It showed a light collision between the Axa customer and another, parked HGV.

The claimant, however, argued that there was a sudden, heavy impact, which threw him forwards and caused him to hit his head on the steering wheel. As a result, he claimed to have facial injuries, whiplash and a feeling of electric shock down his right side, from his neck to his leg.

The dashcam video helped Axa prove that the impact was at such a low speed it couldn’t have caused more than a gentle rocking motion; certainly not the injuries the claimant stated to have. In court, the Judge found the claim to be dishonest an exaggerated.

Taking a stand

While these may seem like minor claims, they point to a bigger problem. Issues like this are happening up and down the country and when they aren’t caught, insurers are paying out unnecessarily and insurance rates may increase. As a result, Axa is taking a very firm stance on tackling fraud.

Fundamental dishonesty, organised and opportunistic fraud and deception are being rooted out with the aid of forensic evidence, dashcams and similar to expose the cheats and benefit the industry and their customers.

Allianz and IMS Form New Partnership for Safer Driving

Danielle
-
0
Allianz and IMS Form New Partnership for Safer Driving

German insurance giant Allianz has partnered with Intelligent Mechatronic Systems (IMS) to develop a new product that aims to make roads safer.

IMS is an innovative producer of telematics systems and the leading connected car and usage based insurance solutions provider. Together with Allianz, they have created BonusDrive, a product that uses enhanced mobile technology to precisely monitor vehicle identification and real time driving behaviour. BonusDrive will also offer accurate driver coaching and feedback on drivers’ performance.

While the idea of vehicle telematics to monitor driving isn’t new, BonusDrive boasts a high level of accuracy and real time monitoring not seen previously. While it provides data collection and performance based analysis through the DriveSync 5 connected car platform, it also aims to offer a compelling end user experience that will encourage more drivers to take part in the scheme.

The benefit for drivers, in addition to safer motorways, is a discount on their insurance costs from Allianz. Simply connecting a 12-volt Bluetooth car adapter in their vehicle and allow the company to monitor how they drive. The insurer will then offer customers who use BonusDrive up to a maximum 30% discount on their premiums at the end of each year.

Allianz and IMS have a shared vision to make roads safer and promote better driver behaviour through the use of BonusDrive. Using such a system can also contribute to lowering the cost of insurance premiums overall, with the potential for less claims. It will even help the environment by reducing fuel consumption through better driving.

What do you think about the partnership between IMS and Allianz? Will BonusDrive and other, similar programs help improve driving conditions and reduce the number of incidents? How would you feel about your insurance company monitoring your driving on a daily basis?

Deutsche Bank: Legal risk control uncertainties abound

Danielle
-
0
Deutsche Bank: Legal risk control uncertainties abound

It seems that Deutsche Bank is having a hard time moving on from their past mistakes. They’ve again come under fire from the Financial Conduct Authority, this time for serious failings in their anti-money laundering controls.

The financial watchdog has come down hard on Deutsche Bank for doing too little to solve the problem of money laundering within its organisation. In fact, the FCA reportedly informed the German banking giant that the senior management has been lacking in engagement and leadership on financial crime, including money laundering, terrorist financing and sanctions failings for a considerable period of time.

A startling example of this is that an estimated $10 billion US Dollars (£6.9 billion) in suspicious trades were discovered in the bank’s Russian offices.

Following the Financial Conduct Authority’s findings, they have now ordered an additional, independent review of Deutsche Bank. Depending on the outcome, it could potentially be followed by an enforcement investigation and considerable fines.

Of course, it was just last year when the bank was fined £1.7 billion by American regulators for rigging Libor rates and it seems they’re having a tough time moving onwards and upwards from that discovery.

Speaking of last year, it was then that efforts were made to ensure higher operating standards within Deutsche Bank, including a review of their “Know Your Client” scheme and all their client intake procedures.

Their goal at that time was to increase transparency and maintain sustainable client relations through tightening internal policies and suspending the addition of new clients. The bank also began introducing new products in areas that were most at risk.

For their part, Deutsche Bank has acknowledged these most recent findings of the Financial Conduct Authority. They have stated that they understand the severity of the issue and are committed to fixing it. Whether they are now more committed to bringing about change than they were last year remains to be seen.

Of course, this is all incredibly bad timing for Deutsche Bank and their leader, John Cryan. With the efforts to boost profitability and revamp the bank, another review isn’t welcome news.

Brazil: Becoming Latin America’s Reinsurance Hub

Danielle
-
0
Brazil: Becoming Latin America’s Reinsurance Hub

Despite the ongoing controversy surrounding Brazil’s government and the economic difficulties, an initiative is being put in place with the intention to turn the country into a regional reinsurance hub.

Presented recently at the CNSEG annual insurance industry event in Rio di Janeiro, the plan is already gaining attention from the London Market.

Latin America’s Insurance Centre

Much like Dubai for the Middle East or Singapore for Asia, supporters of the initiative aim to turn Brazil into a regional reinsurance hotspot for Latin America. However, doing so successfully will depend on the government relaxing certain tax and labour laws. It has been reported that the government intends to evaluate the initiative over the next few months.

Brazil certainly has the capacity and expertise needed to support greater local insurance needs. They’re a huge economy with the potential to compete on an international level. What they require is a strong agenda for growth and modernisation in order to become recognised internationally and regionally as insurance innovators.

Support from London

While the insurance industry overall is supportive of growth in Brazil, the International Underwriting Association‘s Chief Executive, Dave Matcham, has been especially outspoken.

Brazil in turn is looking to London for support, with the city recognised as a powerful centre of knowledge and the greatest global hub for the insurance industry.

The changes Brazilian insurers are pushing for in their own country will make it much easier for clients to access the London Market. In turn, Mr Matcham has stated that London is “very much open for business from Brazil.”

Looking Forward

Over the next few months, expect to hear more about developments in Brazil and their relationship with the London Market. Reportedly, this reinsurance hub project must be sent to the Finance Ministry in Brazil before early June.

If their government is willing to re-evaluate certain laws, it will pave the way for Brazil to become the next international reinsurance hub and double the size of their market.

 

The European Union – Risky road ahead

Walid
-
0
The European Union – Risky road ahead

Last year, Europe saw an upsurge in the number of refugees entering its shores resulting in a migration crisis which is threatening the existence of European Union (EU). Frontex, the EU border agency, recorded 1.8 million detections of illegal entries associated with an estimated one million individuals.

This exponential rise in migrants to Europe was mainly fuelled by the refugee crisis created by the ongoing war in Syria. As a result, Syrians made up the bulk of these migrants outnumbering by far the second biggest nationals namely Afghans.

Refugee numbers by countries chart
Refugee numbers by countries – source: Eurostat

The humanitarian crisis

Therefore, it is no surprise that with significant increase in migrants in such a short period of time; unforeseen and sometimes tragic circumstances were going to occur. First, a great deal of human misery and deaths has taken place as a result.

Such an onslaught of humanity fleeing from their native homes, coupled with unscrupulous human traffickers preying on their desires for a better life in Europe, have resulted in more than 3,700 people dying while trying to cross the Mediterranean sea into Europe.

Thousands more have endured the misery and deprivation involved with such a long trek away from their native lands in search of safety.

Migrants crossing river photo
Migrants crossing a river in Greece

Of the more than 1.3 million official asylum applications filed by these refugees in 2015, the largest number, over 500,000 were for asylum in Germany.
France, Hungary, Italy, Sweden and Austria also had applications numbering over 100,000 each. When the number of asylum applicants is viewed through the metric of native population density, Hungary, Sweden and Austria are the most affected.

Each of those three countries had over 1,000 asylum seekers applying in their countries for every 100,000 of their own population.

It has been suggested that the reason these countries have been disproportionately selected by migrants as their destination is due to their preferential social welfare programs and established Middle Eastern communities.

The problem was exacerbated by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, citing Germany’s humanitarian asylum laws, extended what some call an “open arms” policy to the refugees.

Whether this was inspired by a more fundamental economic reason, such as bolstering Germany’s labour base, or purely for humanitarian reasons, Merkel received a severe backlash from within Germany and throughout Europe as this seemed to coincide with an ever increasing wave of refugees pouring into Europe.

Schengen agreement demise

Hungary, Croatia and even Austria were compelled to apply stricter border crossing enforcements to stem the influx of asylum seekers trying to make their way into Germany. These same countries constructed walls and barriers using razor wire. Sweden and Denmark introduced border controls as well.

Denmark re-introducing border controls photo
Denmark re-introducing border controls

All of this was counter to the stipulations of the Schengen agreement, which for the exception of the United Kingdom and Ireland, had virtually eliminated border controls between the EU member states.

Prior to the refugee crisis that started in 2015, the European Union was already under tremendous pressure dealing with the effects of the 2008 Eurozone crisis, and more recently with the Greek sovereign-debt crisis.

Domestic pressures were already building within the economically stronger member countries, with their populations growing increasingly discontent with financial rescue packages being sent to bail out the less fiscally sound members, such as Greece.

The refugee crisis was simply another drop in a bucket of discontent that had already begun to foster nationalistic and fiscally conservative movements in many member nations of the EU. One of the best examples of this type of movement can be seen in the United Kingdom Independence party, commonly referred to a UKIP.

Founded in 1991, by 2009, with the effects of the 2008 economic crisis in full bloom and an increasing public perception that traditional political parties had foregone their responsibilities to the local working-class, UKIP began to rise in influence. It eventually started winning in local elections as well as in the 2014 European election.

In 2015, UKIP even won a seat in the House of Commons. UKIP is one of the most vocal advocates for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. This is commonly known as the Brexit.

On the 23rd June 2016, there will be a nationwide referendum on whether or not the UK should leave the EU.

Brexit

A UK departure would be significant, although likely not immediately fatal to the European Union. Being a member of the political union, while not a member of the monetary union would help mitigate some of the impact of a UK exit.

Man removes UK flag photo
Brexit – man removes UK flag

It would, however, establish a precedent for other disenchanted member nations to start on the same path.

Social and political movements in the Netherlands, Poland and Denmark already demonstrate a huge fervour from the local population to exert a greater degree of autonomy in their governance. They are striking back at the perceived over reaches of the EU. This is especially true in matters of immigration and economic policy.

The social anxiety that exists in many EU countries today is easily brought to frenzied levels. Situations as the increasing numbers in rapes and sexual assault on European women by males that entered as refugees, or the cases of Islamic extremists engaging in acts of terrorism on European soil, have created a condition ripe for domestic discontent.

The idealised image of the EU as a beacon for unity and modernity seems to have been replaced by a view that it is cumbersome and an impediment to the best interests of each member nation.

2016 will mark the 24th anniversary of the signing of the Maastricht Treaty, the document that formalised the creation of the EU. Will the EU live to see its 25th anniversary? The probability is quite high that it will, even though by then some profound changes may be evident. Whether it survives to see its 30th, 40th or 50th anniversary? That is perhaps less likely.

While it would be prudent for there to always be some sort of economic alliance, or trading block, between the major European nations –  the growing discontent seen in the last eight years coupled with the intense reactions to the refugee crisis are indicative that the number of tomorrows for the EU are numbered.

Concerns over drone insurance coverage limit

Dave
-
0
Concerns over drone insurance coverage limit

A couple of weeks ago, an incident of a suspected drone that reportedly hit a British Airways plane as it prepared to land at Heathrow Airport has raised serious concerns about the use of drones around sensitive areas such as airports.

Police were contacted by the pilot of the BA727 coming from Geneva, carrying 132 passengers and five crew members, to investigate the incident in which his flight was struck by an unidentified flying object as he approached Heathrow on Sunday the 17th April.

Thankfully, the plane was not damaged and nobody was injured in the incident and after investigations by its engineers, British Airways confirmed that the plane was cleared to take off for its next scheduled flight.

The British Airline Pilots’ Association (BALPA) has been vocal on the subject for some time now. It has also been issuing warnings about the drones posing a growing risk to the safety of other aircraft as well as people on the ground.

This is a reminder that although many of the drones bought few months ago as Christmas presents are not just toys. Potentially, they are also capable of causing a major incident if not regulated properly.

Man carrying a drone photo
Man carrying a drone

The Civil Aviation Authority rules  prevent drones from being used near airports, but those rules are being broken. The UK Air Proximity Board investigated seven near misses with planes last December 2015, four of which were classed as being serious. These took place near airports where a crash landing could have been catastrophic.

And this could be a serious problem where insurance is concerned. A number of insurers have developed insurance products to protect drone operators, although while they are happy to offer cover to trained, commercial operators, last Christmas they suddenly realised that thousands of drones were being bought as presents for people who had no training in their use whatsoever, and in many cases those people were children.

Aviva’s household policy has a public liability indemnity limit of £2 million. The insurance provided as part of the British Model Flying Association’s membership package has a £25 million limit, although most of the people who own a recreational drone probably haven’t joined that organisation.

But an Airbus A320 costs around £67 million and this does not take into account the fact that there were 137 people on board the plane that was involved in this week’s suspected drone incident. In other words, if a recreational drone causes a major incident it is likely that the person operating it will either be inadequately insured or possibly even completely uninsured for the risk.

Even if it emerges that this latest incident was not actually a collision with a drone, airline pilots are reporting drone sightings near their aircraft on a daily basis. The number of near misses and pilot sightings suggests that a major incident is going to happen sooner or later.

So with very little insurance cover available for recreational drone use, serious thought needs to be given to finding some way to prevent drone use near airports.

Options could include greater use of technologies such as geo-fencing to prevent drones from being able to fly near airports, better ways to detect and deactivate drones in controlled areas or stricter rules on how they can be used and greater enforcement of those rules.

UN urges insurance industry to lead in climate change

Danielle
-
0
UN urges insurance industry to lead in climate change

United Nations Secretary Ban Ki-moon has called on the insurance industry to be the leader in climate change, citing it as a key player in anticipating and managing environmental issues. He is urging insurance leaders to work alongside the UN to manage and reduce related risks.

Leading the Green Initiative

According to Mr. Ban, the world needs strong leadership from the insurance industry specifically; he sees insurers as imperative in leading the cause for green initiatives.

Of course, insurers already have a history of playing a key part with climate change. They played an instrumental role at Climate Summit 2014 and also helped build up momentum for the Paris Agreement in 2015.

This call to action from the UN could see the industry as a whole play an even larger part with further green initiatives. It’s not enough just to respond when environmental disasters strike, Mr. Ban wants more to be done to prevent them.

 

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon speaking at a conference photo
UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon speaking at a conference

Why the Insurance Industry

So why is the secretary of the United Nations keen for the insurance industry to step into this role? Climate change has a profound affect on their core business. As we experience it around the world, unprecedented numbers of insurance claims will begin to add up. Whether from forest fires, floods or even environment-related health issues, we cannot begin to imagine the claims that may arise in the future.

Today’s decisions will result in tomorrow’s unexpected risks; insurance professionals must learn to better anticipate and act on climate hazards, in line with the recent “Anticipate, Absorb, Reshape” initiative.

Investing in the Future

In addition to climate change affecting the very nature of the insurance industry, the industry itself has a unique opportunity to promote environmental initiatives. After all, insurance companies have some of the largest investment portfolios in the world.

If insurers invest them wisely into green businesses, it could help reduce carbon emissions and protect against further financial disruption. Mr. Ban would like insurers to double clean energy initiatives, specifically. The industry could also make crucial investments that would reduce its own carbon footprint. 

Partnership for the Planet

The UN and the insurance industry could work together to protect the most vulnerable countries from climate change, giving those most likely to suffer easy access to risk transfer mechanisms. This integral partnership will help build resilience to climate change.

What do you think of the insurance industry taking a leadership role when it comes to climate change initiatives? What do you think the impact could be?

 

Ecuador Earthquake: Low Insurance penetration drives tax hike

Walid
-
0
Ecuador Earthquake: Low Insurance penetration drives tax hike

The 7.8 magnitude earthquake that rocked Ecuador on 16 April inflicted a grave human toll, including more than 600 deaths, 4,500 injuries and more than 25,000 people left homeless.

Ecuador earthquake epicente

The earthquake, the most powerful to hit Ecuador in a generation, also wrought a level of economic devastation that would have proved problematic at any time for a developing South American country. But Ecuador, the smallest of the OPEC nations, was already in financial crisis, its reserves depleted by historically low crude prices and slumping markets for its banana and flowers exports.

Those economic conditions leave the country with only $300 million (£207 million) in an emergency fund, plus a projected $600 million from multilateral lenders, to pay for damages that could approach $4 billion (£2.8 billion).

“This isn’t going to take three days or three months,” President Rafael Correa told The Wall Street Journal. “This is going to take years …”

Insured losses could range from $325 million to $850 million, according to catastrophe modeling firm AIR Worldwide. The firm noted that those estimates are based on assumptions about earthquake insurance penetration rates in Ecuador, “about which there is considerable uncertainty.” Ecuador’s private earthquake insurance penetration rate is “low, even by regional standards,” according to LatAm Investor, a U.K.-based Latin America-focused investment magazine.

Ecuador earthquake aftermath
Wikimedia Commons – By Agencia de Noticias ANDES

Faced with such a dearth of resources with which to rebuild, the government is resorting to tax increases for the needed capital, raising its value added tax from 12 percent to 14 percent and imposing new income taxes.

People with assets worth more than $1 million will pay a one-time assessment equal to 0.9 percent of their wealth, while the masses will contribute a day’s salary. Those earning less than $1,000 per month will make the payment just once, people earning $2,000 a month will pay it monthly for two months, and those earning $5,000 or more monthly will pay it monthly for five months.

The government also will sell off unspecified assets.

While Ecuador’s earthquake insurance penetration rate is reportedly low, it could be growing, depending on how many Ecuadorian homeowners and businesses are opting to supplement their policies with an earthquake coverage endorsement. Such opportunities have certainly increased in number, as general property insurance penetration in the country grew by 20 percent from 2010 to 2015, according to a report by Timetric.

While Correa’s tax increases will likely generate enough revenue to fund reconstruction, the trade and tourism sectors have been hit hard, and there is uncertainty about the country’s economic future. The leftist president’s public welfare spending was robust and popular during the oil boom but the government failed to set aside any reserves for the rainy day that it’s now experiencing.

Some analysts worry that the tax hikes will further slow the already struggling economy as costs for materials rise. Also, uncertain is the future of insurance reforms Correa has tried to implement.

The government in March 2015 announced that insurance carriers operating in the country may no longer cede more than 5 percent of their premiums to reinsurers outside of the country, an effort aimed at keeping more money in Ecuador. But the insurance industry, which sends up to 50 percent of premiums to foreign reinsurers, has strongly opposed the measure and compliance has been slow.

Insurance companies initially were required to meet the new 5 percent threshold by March 2016, but on April 14, just two days before the quake, the government announced an 18-month extension for compliance.

Periodical Payments Orders – The Implications for Insurers

Billy
-
0
Periodical Payments Orders – The Implications for Insurers

Periodical payments orders (PPOs) which are also known as structured settlements, were introduced into personal injury litigation by the Courts Act 2003 and came into effect on 1st April 2005.

The new law enabled the court to make a periodical payments order, rather than a conventional lump sum, even if neither the plaintiff nor the defendant had requested it.

Therefore, if someone suffers serious personal injuries, such as in a motor collision, and makes a claim against the insurance policy of the person responsible, the compensation they receive may be in the form of either a lump sum or a series of regular lifetime payments – a structured settlement/PPO.

As such, the Courts Act 2003 represented a major change to the law regarding the calculation of the amount of compensation in the most serious personal injury cases and brought with it some quite significant implications for the claimant and the insurers involved.

The Motivation behind the Courts Act 2003

The reasoning behind the act was to enhance the compensation payable to claimants by removing the risk that they faced in investing a lump sum, the impact of inflation and the possibility that the lump sum would be insufficient if their longevity had been under estimated when the lump sum was calculated.

These risks are, instead, now placed firmly in the hands of the insurers, who are felt to be more capable of bearing them, thus affording greater certainty to the claimant. The implications of this for insurers and reinsurers are quite marked.

Effect on Insurers

The Courts Act 2003 has various implications for insurers in the most serious personal injury claims. These can be summarised as follows:

  • The creation of uncertainty as to how to make provision for what is, in the final analysis, an unknown future cost.
  • The introduction of a commitment that lasts the lifetime of the claimant.
  • The imposition of significant administration costs over the lifetime of the claimant.
  • The inability to match assets with liabilities, impacting on the net real investment return.
  • The impact of retentions on buyers of reinsurance, meaning that the primary insurer may have to self-fund a PPO loss, possibly over a period of many years.

These factors have been added to by subsequent case law, which determined that inflation was to be linked to average earnings and ASHE 6115, rather than the retail prices index (RPI), which has, historically, tended to rise more slowly.

Over the lifetime of a claimant this could give rise to a substantial increase in the amount paid under the PPO.

Effect on Reinsurers

Because PPOs are normally awarded in serious or catastrophic injury cases recoverable under a reinsurance excess of loss contract, it is anticipated, as more of this type of order is made, that reinsurers will be called upon to handle a higher percentage of claims than primary insurers.

Reinsurers may also run additional risks, such as investment and timing of payment risks and, of course, their administrative cost of claims handling would rise.

The financial implications of a PPO were underlined in a recent case, marking the first PPO to be made in Jersey. In that case, the claimant was able to establish liability for a road accident that caused him serious injuries resulting in ongoing behavioural and cognitive problems.

The settlement that was ultimately agreed was in the sum of £9 million, part of which was to be paid by way of a lump sum, with the reminder to be paid over the claimant’s lifetime in a series of regular payments through a PPO.

The insurer, AXA, would be responsible for maintaining these payments throughout the claimant’s lifetime – a significant commitment.

Addressing the Risks

Traditionally, the risks of longevity, inflation, and investment are managed by the life assurance market and in an ideal world insurers would be able to transfer these risks to that market through purchasing annuities.

Regrettably, the UK annuity market is by no means in an optimum state and does not effectively cater for injuries of the severity suffered by those claimants who are awarded a PPO.

In the absence of an annuity, the insurer has the option of either using the capital markets or self-funding the PPO, neither of which is an ideal solution to the problem. Although it will not reduce the exposure of insurers and reinsurers to the effect of PPOs a new tool, created by Aon Benfield, enables insurers to calculate their exposure to PPO claims and to assess the extent to which reinsurance might alter the degree of exposure.

The ability to make a more detailed calculation of their exposure should assist insurers in analysing capital charges and making better informed strategy decisions with regard to new business and reinsurance. 

PPOs clearly provide greater certainty to claimants in serious personal injury cases. They have also introduced challenges to the insurance industry.

For those challenges to be successfully overcome, the industry needs to work in a co-ordinated way to find solutions. These should include adopting a greater willingness to take on liabilities and the evolution of reinsurance contracts to shift the balance of power more in favour of purchasers of excess of loss reinsurance.

 

Generali launches new property product for US multinationals

Danielle
-
0
Generali launches new property product for US multinationals

Generali, the Italian insurance giant, has partnered with BELFOR Property Restoration to bring a dynamic risk management solution to US-based multinational corporations. The product, Tribune, is set to be a game-changer due to its comprehensive solutions for both American and overseas property exposures.

Generali’s innovative partnership with BELFOR means Tribune clients can access a variety of services tailored to the multinational market, without having to place multiple calls to insurance providers around the globe.

Instead, the program, which is administered from one central location, ensures Americans’ property insurance needs are met regardless of where their assets are located.

Through this partnership, Generali seeks to provide added value for their clients, with features such as cross-border premium transfers, the ability to adjust and settle claims locally and access to a vast network of loss control engineers.

Essentially, clients benefit from the consistency and efficiency of Generali’s global network, with a human touch when it comes to local servicing. From the Italians’ standpoint, it will help prevent the kind of international insurance fragmentation that too often plagues multinationals.

Tribune clients also have the ability to make use of BELFOR’s ‘Red Alert Priority Response Program, which Generali recommends for loss control and mitigation. As the very nature of multinational corporations, means their assets are spread across the globe, this partnership is uniquely equipped to respond to the types of cross-border risk management issues they can face.

Generali, as one of the top insurance companies in the world and the best Italian brand for strength and value, generated a total premium income of €74 billion (£60 billion) in 2015. They have more than 76,000 staff members in 60 countries around the globe. Proving their innovation with products like Tribune is recognized outside of their industry, they were the only insurer featured in MIT’s Technology Review of the “50 Smartest Companies in the World.”

The Tribune product has a capacity of $250 million (£200 million) to write commercial property risks for US multinationals, covering their exposure at home and abroad and connecting Americans with Generali’s truly global network.

Could Tribune be a game-changer for the insurance industry? Are other insurance companies prepared to follow suit with similar products for businesses that manage assets in their home countries and abroad? Time will reveal which major insurer is next set to follow Generali’s lead.

1...161718...20Page 17 of 20