Upload
toby-gray
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Coastal Property Residual Markets:Challenges and Potential Solutions
Prepared by David C. Marlett, PhD, CPCU Appalachian State University
The Brantley Risk and Insurance Center www.insurance.appstate.edu
Prepared for 2008 Out of the Storm Hilton Head, SC
Estimated Insured Value of Coastal Exposure (2007, $ Billions)
$895.1
$224.4
$191.9
$158.8
$132.8
$92.5
$85.6
$51.8
$14.9
$2,458.6
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000
Florida
Texas
Louisiana
S. Carolina
Virginia
North Carolina
Alabama
Georgia
Mississippi
Maryland
Source: AIR Worldwide athttp://www.air-worldwide.com/_public/images/pdf/AIR2008_Coastline_at_Risk.pdf?src=email
Over the last three years (2005-2007), the insured value of
properties in coastal areas grew at a 7.3%/year compound rate. If this growth rate persists, the insured
value will double by 2017.
In Some States, Coastal Exposure is aHigh Percent of the State’s Insured Value
35%
28%
26%
17%
13%
12%
11%
9%
5%
79%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Florida
Louisiana
S. Carolina
Texas
U.S.
Mississippi
Alabama
Virginia
North Carolina
Georgia
Source: Insurance Information Institute and AIR Worldwide June 11, 2008 release, athttp://www.air-worldwide.com/_public/images/pdf/AIR2008_Coastline_at_Risk.pdf?src=email
“Insured value” is an estimate of the cost to replace structures
and their contents, including additional living expenses and business interruption coverage,
for all residential and commercial property in a state
that is or can be insured.
Insurability
Standard market E&S market Residual market
Market of last resort Beach plan Wind pool Citizens FAIR
Why Have Residual Markets
Economic Development
Lenders, Construction, Real Estate Agents, Developers
“market of last resort”
Major Issues
Subsidization and Risk Seeking Behavior Measuring the Risk Catastrophe Loss Financing Arrangements Political Pressures and Rate Suppression Transparency Leadership and Board Composition Accountability Role of Excess and Surplus Lines Insurers
Residual Market Mechanisms
FAIR Plan Urban Protection and Reinsurance Act of 1968 Roughly half the states still have a FAIR Plan
Beach Plans / Wind Pools Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, North
Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas. Virginia coastal property owners are insured through a FAIR plan.
State Wind or Beach Pools
Source: Daniel Sutter University of Texas – Pan American Presentation at ALEC, 7/30/08 State Current Name Year Established Policies in Force Total Liability
Alabama Alabama Insurance Underwriting Association
1970 9,699(6/08)
$1.682 Billion
Florida Citizens Property Insurance Corporation
1970 1,216,960(5/31/08)
$441.9 Billion
Louisiana Louisiana Citizens 1968 129,203(3/07)
$21.13 Billion
Mississippi Mississippi Underwriting Association
1987 39,340(11/07)
$5.709 Billion
North Carolina NC Insurance Underwriting Association
1969 163,527(3/31/08)
$67.80 Billion
South Carolina SC Wind and Hail Underwriting Association
1970 42,663(4/30/08)
$16.80 Billion
Texas Texas Windstorm Insurance Association
1971 216,008(12/31/07)
$58.64 Billion
Residual Market Penetration
Residual Market –
(% Homeowners Premiums)
Source: PCI, based on data from NAIC, PIPSO and NCIUA
21.3%
14.1%
9.7%
6.8% 6.4%
1.4%
4.6%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
Florida Massachusetts North Carolina
All States Louisiana Rhode
Island Remaining
States
Residual Market Penetration
Statewide Market Penetration doesn’t tell whole story because the it is the coastal property presents the greatest exposure due to location and value
The Coastal Insurance Market in North Carolina
North Carolina as a case study
Raise issues to encourage discussion
NCRB Rating Territories
Homeowners Insurance DWP and Market Share in North Carolina (2007)
State Farm Fire $314,171,122 19%
North Carolina Farm Bureau $213,326,084 13%
Nationwide Mutual Fire Ins Co $172,200,108 10%
Allstate Ins Co $96,455,898 6%
Nationwide Mutual Ins Co $85,288,950 5%
Allstate Indemnity Co $70,297,549 4%
Erie $63,021,060 4%
USAA $54,218,394 3%
Unitrin Auto & Home Ins Co $42,211,019 3%
Auto Owners Ins Co $32,945,885 2%
Liberty Mutual Fire Ins Co $30,618,782 2%
Phoenix Ins Co $29,086,002 2%
USAA Casualty Ins Co $25,451,905 2%
Peerless Ins Co $24,544,825 1%
Standard Fire Ins Co $23,315,478 1%
Farmers Insurance $21,621,787 1%
Homeowners Insurance Loss Experiencein North Carolina
Year Loss Ratio
1996 206 %
1997 56 %
1998 76 %
1999 91 %
2000 62 %
2001 50 %
2002 61 %
2003 67 %
2004 44 %
2005 39 %
2006 42 %
2007 45 %
average 70 %
Source: NC Department of Insurance
ROE for Homeowners Insurancein North Carolina, 1997 - 2006
11.4%
24.0% 24.9%
17.0%
29.0%
2.8%7.3%7.0%
-4.9%
-16.2%-20%
-15%
-10%
-5%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Source: NAIC and the Insurance Information Institute
Average HO ROE in NC from 1997 through 2006 was 10.2% -- well below the
Fortune 500 All-Industry average.
NC Homeowners Insurance:Loss Ratio, 1986-2005*
58.4
62.2 73
.616
8.9
73.9
54.0
59.6
57.6
206.
155
.6 75.7 90
.9
61.9
49.9 60
.667
.144
.139
.257.2 70
.9
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 5
Los
s R
atio
(%
) .
*Excludes expenses, taxes, commissions and dividends.Source: NAIC; Insurance Information Institute
Hugo
Emily FranBonnie Floyd
Isabel
North Carolina Rate Bureau
Statute – § 58‑36‑1 North Carolina Rate Bureau
Essential lines (residential property, personal auto and workers compensation)
The Governing Committee is composed of 12 representatives of member companies and two non-voting members appointed by the Governor
Annual Filing with DOI for Homeowners is not required
History of Homeowners Insurance Rate Changessource: NC Department of Insurance
Filed Date
Overall Filed/Proposed
Rate ChangeEffective
DateCOI Ordered Rate
ChangeRB Implemented
Rate Change
18-Jun-1993 13.5% 01-Oct-1994 2.0% 2.0%
03-Dec-1998 15.6% 01-Jun-1999 4.3% 4.3%
22-Mar-2002 20.0% 15-Aug-2002 5.0% 5.0%
25-Feb-2005 12.1% 01-Aug-2005 2.2% 2.2%
29-Dec-2006 21.9% 01-May-2007 5.4%
North Carolina’s Residual Markets
NCJUA North Carolina Joint Underwriting Association “FAIR Plan”
NCIUA North Carolina Insurance Underwriting Association “Beach Plan” (Beach and Coastal)
The North Carolina Beach Plan
The Beach Plan was created in 1969 to cover only those barrier islands adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean.
In 1998, the Beach Plan was expanded by the NC General Assembly to include the eighteen (18) coastal counties (called the Coastal Area) for Windstorm and Hail Insurance Only coverage.
The plan was authorized to begin offering Homeowners Insurance Policies for principle residences effective July 1, 2003 for all 18 coastal counties.
Operation of Beach and Fair Plans
14 member Board of Directors 7 representatives from the insurance industry 4 licensed agents 3 members of the general public
The 2006 budget for the operation of the Beach plan provides estimated annual expenses of $8.4 million dollars. FAIR plan 2006 budget estimate is $5.6 million.
(Accounting and Fiscal Affairs Committee, Annual Board Meeting)
Summary of Combined Exposure for NC Beach and FAIR Plan Premium,
Exposure and Loss Potential
Source: http://www.ncjua-nciua.org
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Written Premium $99 mil. $130 mil. $180 mil. $196 mil $269 mil.
Total Insured Value $28 bil. $39 bil. $51 bil. $54 bil. $68 bil.
Ave. Annual Loss $110 mil. $146 mil. $230 mil. $235 mil. $270 mil.
100 Year PML $1.8 bil. $2.4 bil. $2.9 bil. $3.3 bil. $3.8 bil.
The North Carolina Beach Plan Catastrophe Loss Financing
Most beach plans include a combination of accumulating a reserve, assessments, and reinsurance
North Carolina is unique in that it has only recently purchased reinsurance and relies primarily on assessments
Dangerous to rely on Assessments (especially a modified form)
Reasons for Buying Reinsurance
Liquidity improves since payment from reinsurer should be faster and more reliable than assessments
Rely less on assessments which should stabilize market due to fewer potential insolvencies from assessments
Can define the cost of risk (reinsurance premium)
Establish relationship with reinsurer and broker which may be valuable during rough times. Gain expertise and trust.
Reasons for Buying Reinsurance
The “reinsurance questionnaire” was sent out to 200 member companies and 113 responded. The first question asked whether or not the respondents felt that their company had adequate capacity to absorb potential beach plan losses and 89 said yes.
The President of the Independent Insurance Agents of North Carolina submitted a letter to the General Manager of the Beach Plan expressing a desire for the Beach Plan to consider buying reinsurance
Reasons against Buying Reinsurance
Takes large chunk of retained earnings and will slow ability to grow surplus
Odds are high that it will not be needed
Tax implications (could lose tax exempt status)
Insurers can buy their own reinsurance and manage their assessment exposure
Reasons Against Buying Reinsurance
Less incentive for insurers to try and avoid the assessments by writing voluntarily along the coast.
Lessens overall capacity for standard market regarding NC coastal exposure
It is expensive and the cost can change for many reasons (worldwide market)
Assessments
Initially based upon market share
Ability to reduce obligations through voluntary writings
Are they reliable?
Will they destabilize insurers and market?
Assessments
Can insurers pass the cost along or are they supposed to absorb?
What happens when insurers become insolvent and cannot pay?
What is the role of the Guaranty Fund?
Results in massive subsidy to property owners along coastline
Preliminary Recommendations
1. The Beach Plan should once again truly act as the “market of last resort” and not be the “market of choice”
Allow rate levels to be influenced more by market competition than regulatory authorities.
Streamline the rate approval process Ensure that coverage from the Beach Plan is not
superior to that offered in the standard market. Review the 15% differential develop a figure with a
sound actuarial basis
Preliminary Recommendations
2. Verify that the Beach plan is prepared to meet financial obligations that may result following a catastrophic event.
The Beach Plan should purchase reinsurance that is adequate to pay claims following the 100 year probable maximum loss
Verify the reliability of assessments. The Beach Plan administration should conduct loss simulations to estimate impact of assessments on insurers (particularly smaller ones)
Preliminary Recommendations
3. Decrease the reliance on assessments that would result in non-coastal regions subsidizing the coastal region.
Purchase adequate reinsurance
The disbursement of retained earnings to insurers should also be suspended. The Beach Plan should not disperse funds to insurers until there are funds in place (or reinsurance coverage) that are adequate to pay claims resulting from the probable maximum loss
Preliminary Recommendations
4. Make operation of Beach Plan transparent
Hold meetings in major cities and invite the public Post catastrophe loss financing plans on their
website. This should include specific information on reserve funds, assessments and reinsurance.
Revise board membership to include non-coastal resident
Clarify leadership structure and decision making process