Staff-T1
About
- Username
- Staff-T1
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,786
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
* Even if they are capped but you get a bunch of them then they would still add up to large amounts * I guess technically yes. But the regulation only targets minor injuries. I don't think minor injuries are the main driver?
-
Yeap I was mistaken AnLaPe is correct! It's only ON where the minor injury cap is for medical and rehab
-
A pure no fault model has nothing to do with the delivery of services. Pure no fault basically means no sue-ing the at fault party. Everyone claims from their own insurer. Like Quebec. It should technically help keeps costs lower and claim times sho…
-
I am not sure I follow. What formula for investment yield? The investment yield here is given as 5%
-
You can do it either way as long as it is not explicitly stated. The examiner's report itself said discounting either at mid-year or year-end is acceptable
-
How is your earned premium greater than your premiums paid at inception though? How can you have $1000 dollars of earned premium on $500 of written premium? I think that's the biggest issue here ~
-
* They would provide it to you if it's needed. I generally expect it to just be UEP - DAC should it be tested. * Not sure that's right since I think directly attributable just means the expense can be linked to the policy while not directly attribu…
-
Yup and to tag on to felixc5, you could be undercharged and be below the GRID premium
-
I think the sample answer makes it quite clear. For example, there is a > 10% chance to make a 10% loss. It does not matter if 2/3 scenarios will have nothing ceded
-
Basically these 2 papers cover similar concepts with respect to the management of catastrophic (EQ) risk. Good EQ risk management practice in the OSFI paper can be applicable to the AM Best rating. You could also answer this question using bullet po…
-
From the solution it seems the GEP is part of the cash amount otherwise it would be double counting? <- I think you need to rephrase this. I am having trouble understanding what you mean here. Where in the solution does it imply that GEP is part …
-
It's off the syllabus now - But honestly you can just make an educated guess since it's pretty intuitive. Uhhh there's a lot to know and I can't go through the whole AR to list out what is important for you. I think if you go through the BA wiki an…
-
Your calculation is incorrect: * Unpaid Claims + Claim PFaD = 3000 X1.15X0.6/1.0234 = 2023 * Interest Rate PFaD = 3000X0.6X(1/1.0159 - 1/1.0234) = 13 * Reinsurance PFaD = 3000X0.4X0.02/1.0234 = 23 2023 + 13 + 23 = 2059
-
So a solvency scenario is the worst possible scenario under the FCT guidelines. If assets must be > liabilities for point 3, it should definitely hold for less severe scenarios too (i.e. points 1 and 2)
-
Possibly increased investment income and perhaps also increased reinsurance receivables
-
AnLaPe is spot on with the explanation
-
I think so. The CAS are not rigid and if an answer makes sense from another paper that was not the paper being targeted, it will generally be accepted too as long as it makes sense
-
It is not the same. As there is an aggregate deductible and limit, the XOL policy is probably on a per risk basis. Self retention and deductible are different things. This website has a really good example: https://www.alignedinsurance.com/deducti…
-
Credit score can be used to rate property policies but is prohibited for Auto
-
But then again, even with a higher reinsurance MFaD your ceded would technically be 0 since the reinsurer has already defaulted so I don't think it will matter here ~ Regarding available capital your answer makes sense! It slipped my mind that it wi…
-
It's to help citizens afford coverage. I don't think there's much more to it
-
I think Graham is just saying that for this case specifically, in BC we would reject the notion of absolute liability. However, I do agree there is some disconnect between the question and battle card. @graham thoughts?
-
Yes - Sometimes (Actually a lot of times) the CAS are really inconsistent. I would just follow the study kit definition to be on the safe side though - But definitely state your assumptions in the exam
-
No CI is not net of dividends. It's more like dividends must be subtracted from equity ~ Dividends are not an expense so they would not be reported on the income statement. @graham thoughts?
-
AnLaPe is correct in all their points
-
BC stands for British Columbia
-
std = standards
-
Operating expenses do not include investment expenses that's why you'd need to include it. Operating expenses are more like ALAE and ULAE. For your last question, please refer here: https://www.battleactsmain.ca/vanillaforum/discussion/677/2018-f…
-
Are you sure you are referring to the eight questions? Spring 2017 Q17 is a risk transfer question?
-
Yeah the plaintiff can be compensated for the total gross income - I think it can also be like 70% or smth ~ 100% if also a % of gross income