News & Reports Archives
These bulletins
are emailed to clients and friends prior to being posted online.
If you would like to be on our mailing list, please send us a request
via email. Thank you.
"HOLD
THAT BALLOT UP TO THE LIGHT"
Election
Brouhaha Has Risk management Lesson
Before the fact
/ After the fact. Only a one word difference, but a difference that
could start wars.
Was the US Supreme
Court really talking about poker when they debated
the course of the election? Perhaps they were actually discussing
insurance!
A single basic
principle is at the core of all three: you can't change the rules
in the middle of the game.
Before an election
you can easily get both sides to agree on recount procedures; after
the voting nothing could be harder, and for good reason:. after
ballots have been cast, the results can be manipulated by a changing
of the rules. A dealer in a poker game can set the parameters before
the cards are dealt. It doesn't much matter what they are. Rule
changes after the deal are - in the words of Jesse James-"inappropriate."
Insurance is
like elections and poker, but in the extreme.
Your company's
fate can depend on whether you acted prudently vis-a-vis your insurer
before the fact; after the fact (i.e. the loss) your hands will
be tied.
The only way
to get the insurance coverage you need is to negotiate for it (standard
forms will not do the job). Before a loss this is feasible. The
coverage you ask for will be priced at a certain level, and after
give and take there will be an agreement. The insurer deals in large
numbers. There will be losses, but the underwriter doesn't know
from where specifically. Thus your risk is as good as any other.
The terms you
negotiate will be documented via the insurance policy. The policy
will (inevitably) be issued with errors, and (before loss) these
errors can be corrected. Written documentation is paramount in insurance.
THE SCREW TURNS
When you have
an insurance loss the atmospherics will change. This is now "after
the fact." It's as though the election has been held or the
cards have been dealt. Negotiations with the insurer were doable;
now they're impossible. The parties are nervously eyeing each other
across the card table. Ballots are now being held up to the light.
The language
of the insurance policy, accurate or not in representing the agreement,
will now be memorialized. Contract law generally allows only "outward
expressions" of intent into evidence. The parol evidence rule
normally excludes all other evidence (oral agreements or side letters,
etc.) which are offered to contradict the terms of the written agreement.
Now the policy's exclusions are like ballots every one "must
be counted." Phrases, words and punctuation marks are examined
like chads. Everyone's hands must stay on top of the poker table.
It's too late to say "what I meant was...
" The point
is the event has happened and the rules are set. An insurer will
fight harder on this score than anyone else you deal with. Why?
Mathematics:
Generally speaking
an "average" premium for insurance can be around 1/10 of
1% of the insurer's maximum possible payout, i.e. the policy limit.
This applies to both property and liability insurance. This means
that the insurer could suffer a loss equal to 1000 times what you
would have paid for the insurance. This negative leverage makes the
insurer more passionate about the "sanctity of the contract."
Do you
have any chance after loss of discussing true intent vs.policy terms?
Yes. If the loss is small enough or you litigate long enough.
LESSONS FROM
CHADVILLE
Do everything
you need to do before the fact:
a.. Understand your needs and negotiate for them
b.. Document your negotiations
c.. Read your policy and have it amended to conform to the actual
agreement
d.. Hire professional risk management help to do these things for
you
Write the rules
in advance, or try to change them later. Which position would you
rather be in?
Those in Florida
may take a chance. For all others I recommend prospective action.
Contact us
for help in risk management strategy and implementation.
Licata Kelleher
is a risk management consulting firm. The firm does not sell insurance,
but does counsel clients on the effectiveness of insurance, on reducing
the cost of insurance and on the risk management process.
The above is
intended to be general information, and should not be construed
as specific recommendations.
For more information, contact Debora Wu, at DWU@LicataRisk.com
News & Reports Archives
More News
May 8, 2008 THE STATE OF COMPUTER SECURITY
February 1, 2008 TERRORISM PROGRAM RENEWED
November 27, 2007 GLOBAL WARMING PANEL IN BOSTON RAISES KEY ISSUES
October 19, 2007 GLOBAL WARMING SYMPOSIUM
August 29, 2007 HURRICANE DEAN AN OMEN?
April 25, 2007 WHO'S LIABLE FOR PET FOOD CONTAMINATION-THE RISK OF PRODUCT LIABILITY
Reports
Fall 2005 INTERNATIONAL RISK MANAGEMENT
Spring 2004 EMPLOYMENT LAW MORPHS INTO A MONSTER
Fall 2004 INSURANCE BROKER SUED BY NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL
Summer 2004 UNDERSTANDING THE DYNAMICS OF THE INSURANCE MARKET
Winter 2004 WORLD TRADE CASE UNVEILS INNER WORKINGS OF INSURANCE BROKER
Fall 2003 A RISK MANAGEMENT APPROACH CFOs (AND THEIR ACCOUNTANTS) CAN LOVE
Summer 2003 PRESERVING COVERAGE FOR INNOCENT INSUREDS
Spring 2003 LEAVING TERRORISM COVERAGE ON THE TABLE
Winter 2003 COMPUTER SECURITY IS NOT A BLACK HOLE
Fall 2002 "LET'S BE CAREFUL OUT THERE
Spring/Summer 2002 WHAT WARREN BUFFET KNOWS ABOUT INSURANCE COMPANY FINANCIALS
Spring 2002 OPPORTUNITIES ABOUND IN DEVELOPMENT OF CONTAMINATED PROPERTIES
Winter 2001 "YOU CAN'T PAY US THIS MONTH? WHAT DO YOU MEAN 'NEW DEVELOPMENTS?"
Fall 2001 WORLD TRADE TERRORISM -- REPERCUSSIONS FOR INSURANCE MARKET
Summer 2001 ENERGY AVAILABILITY: CURRENT REALITY OR FOND MEMORY?
Spring 2001 "HOLD THAT BALLOT UP TO THE LIGHT"