Tag Archives: Property Insurance

Immediate Vault Immediate Access

Should You Revisit Insured Property Value Estimates?

Posted on by

One of the first steps in obtaining commercial property insurance is to determine the value of the property being insured. The reported property value will drive premium amounts and, importantly, represents the property loss exposure.

Some commonly used property valuation methods include: obtaining an appraisal from a third-party firm; utilizing fixed-asset records adjusted for cost inflation; or using a simple benchmarking factor, such as dollars per square foot. In some cases, utilizing a simplified valuation approach can provide a reasonable value estimate with minimal effort. On the other hand, performing an appraisal (which insurers typically consider the “gold standard”) can provide much-needed accuracy and thoroughness, but will require a greater commitment of time and resources. 

At times, elevating the accuracy of a property value estimate can provide significant advantages during the insurance placement process. The key for risk managers, brokers and insurers is to recognize situations in which an accurate and comprehensive property valuation is critical. Consider these eight factors in the context of the insured property to see if a deep dive into the value estimate is necessary:  

  1. Size of exposure and riskiness of operation
    When property exposures are immense or operations are inherently risky, a thorough estimation process should be conducted every three to five years. Refineries and chemical processing plants with billion-dollar exposures and high-risk operations are a prime example—the stakes are too high to rely on cursory valuation methods over the long term.
  2. Changes in costs  
    Over time, some property costs will change more than others. These fluctuations are primarily driven by changes in technology, capability, and material and labor costs. As of this writing, there have been significant increases in commodity prices such as steel and lumber, which are driving up the costs of new property and equipment. When property is subject to a rapidly changing cost environment, this complexity needs to be carefully considered within the estimation method.  
  3. Complexity and scope of property 
    Global operations and complex properties often require a thorough analysis to be performed periodically. There is simply too much detail and nuance to use an abbreviated estimating approach for an extended period without introducing the possibility of significant error. Many global firms establish a multi-year process in which a comprehensive analysis is performed on a portion of properties each year.  
  4. Type of capital expenditures 
    A company’s capital expenditures typically represent either new asset additions or improvements to existing assets. Accounting for new assets is a straightforward process of addition. However, capital expenditures that represent improvements in condition may not translate directly into increasing replacement value for insurance purposes. This is a frequent occurrence within heavy industrial and processing operations and can result in an overestimation of value if not properly analyzed.  
  5. Major changes to business or operations 
    Major changes within a business, such as reconfiguring a manufacturing facility, adding production capacity, acquiring new businesses, consolidating operations, or relocating an operation, are likely to result in changes to the property and assets. Making a diligent effort to assess these circumstances in detail will help establish an accurate property value that can be used going forward.  
  6. Insurance market conditions 
    As of this writing, the property insurance market has experienced substantial price increases for three consecutive years. When insurance prices are high, developing an accurate estimate of property value will provide assurance that the coverage is neither more nor less than necessary. Developing reliable and accurate value estimates can also be a key differentiator for insureds when engaging with insurers in a difficult market.  
  7. Recent losses reveal inaccurate value estimates 
    Insurers will seriously question the validity of reported property values if a recent property loss reveals large inaccuracies in reported value estimates. In this case, performing a comprehensive valuation of the insured property is the best course of action.  
  8. Adjusting value estimates over time 
    Many companies adjust value estimates from the prior year to account for cost inflation. The accuracy of this approach will diminish over time. For typical commercial properties, conducting a comprehensive valuation every five to eight years can help recalibrate value estimates.  

Correctly valuing insurable property is one of the most critical inputs for managing property risk. While a shorthand valuation estimate may suffice in some circumstances, it is not a perfect solution to every situation. Sometimes there is no substitute for a thorough and diligent value estimate. Striking the right balance between valuation accuracy and effort requires knowing when an estimate is good enough and when it is not.  

Texas Cold Crisis: Insurance Options for Severe Weather Disruption

Posted on by

On February 15, a massive and unseasonal storm with frigid temperatures spiked the demand for power and outpaced the supply, severing power to 26 million Texans. Unpredictable weather patterns present risks for business owners, but also create an opportunity to improve their risk mitigation strategies to address future uncertainties. 

Power outages are not caused by storms alone. Heat waves, hurricanes and wildfires can also create power outages—and outages are more common than business leaders may think. S&C’s 2018 Commercial and Industrial Power Reliability Report found that one in four businesses experience at least one power outage per month. The Department of Energy estimates that these outages cost companies $150 million per year. Although companies may face spoilage-related losses, data centers often experience the most severe consequences. When a data center goes down, it can impact a business’s most vital proprietary assets. According to a Ponemon Institute study, the cost of an unplanned data center outage is $5,600 per minute with an average recovery time of 119 minutes resulting in a loss over $690,000.

The cost for businesses goes beyond damage. Litigation tends to run rampant, and with the recent Texas power outages, businesses are already facing lawsuits. The family of an 11-year-old boy who died of hypothermia is suing energy company Entergy and grid operator Electric Reliability Company of Texas. Multiple wrongful death lawsuits are predicted from incidents including carbon monoxide poisonings, house fires and shelter closings.

A range of insurance options can help businesses protect themselves from complex, evolving and completely unpredictable risks such as natural disasters and climate change.

Property insurance protects the building and physical assets like equipment, supplies, inventory, fixtures and computers. However, property insurance may not provide all the coverage needed. Exclusions like floods, sink holes, earthquakes, terror incidents, and chemical, nuclear, biological and environmental events are likely not covered. An unexpected policy exclusion can be devastating and result in a claim being denied, leaving business owners and leaders feeling helpless and infuriated.

Business interruption insurance is helpful but may not be enough. Typically, when damage obstructs business operations, it is covered by property insurance, and business interruption insurance covers losses from interruption. However, a natural disaster can create a perfect storm, so to speak. For example, if an establishment is forced to close due to lack of power, there can be a denial of claims. Business owners may be able to have property repaired, but cannot recoup the lost revenue through insurance.

Another option for businesses is to choose captive insurance and own their own insurance company. This establishes a more robust approach to risk management, and enables the business or business owner to own a profitable second business. This can help lower commercial insurance costs, build up assets and loss reserves, enhance critically needed cash flow and liquidity, and help prevent losses from hollowing out the total business entity. Importantly, successful captive insurance companies are filled with liquid assets that back the reserves for potential future losses, owned by the business or business owner. Liquid assets are often more desirable than durable assets that depreciate and may be difficult to sell. Finally, a captive insurance company is a regulated entity.

A captive primarily insures its parent company or related companies, so the parent company can purchase insurance from its wholly owned captive. Such purchases may replace all, or a portion, of its commercial insurance. Additionally, risks that are unable to be insured, are cost prohibitive, or are underinsured in the commercial insurance market can be placed in the captive insurance company. The captive can also insure gaps in third-party commercial insurance policies.

Benefits of Captives in Natural Disasters

While businesses with claims for property insurance or business interruption coverage are denied, a business with a captive insurance company would not face exclusions that leave them vulnerable. Since a captive insurance policy can be written to be broad and robust, it has more triggers than third-party commercial insurance, sos an event may covered where business interruption might not provide coverage.

Captive insurance also serves as a valuable financial strategy. When captives build up loss reserves, backed by corresponding assets, those assets are available for dealing with a catastrophic event. When a business has to restart or relocate their operations, assets are readily available to help it navigate the challenges and pursue big changes. The business owner can use the asset buildup in successfully managed captive insurance companies to help grow the business by funding acquisitions, growth strategies and enhanced risk mitigation strategies via a dividend from the captive insurance company to the business owner.

Before another crisis strikes, businesses should review insurance policies, determine whether current policies offer adequate coverage, and determine if a captive will help them face the next worst-case scenario.

Managing Coronavirus Business Interruptions

Posted on by

The novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV, now called COVID-19, has continued to spread through China and beyond, with more than 1,800 deaths reported as of this writing. The virus’s spread has also had major impacts on business operations around the world, slowing or shuttering international companies’ operations in China and prompting travel restrictions and evacuations.

Businesses around the world are taking travel precautions and creating or updating existing response plans to address these risks. Dr. Adrian Hyzler, chief medical officer of healthcare, assistance and risk management company Healix, told the RIMScast podcast that “Companies have to think on their feet and have crisis meetings, twice, sometimes three times a week just to try and keep up with the changes in government regulations and what they have to do to try and manage the situation.”

But companies may not be able to manage all of the issues resulting from COVID-19-related business interruptions, and some may even fail to fulfill their contractual obligations because of supply chain complications, risking severe penalties. If this occurs, companies throughout the supply chain have options for protecting themselves or recovering from lost business.

If contracts allow, companies may attempt to invoke force majeur clauses, which, according to international law firm Reed Smith, “excuse a party’s performance of a contract if an unforeseen event beyond its control prevents performance.” To prepare for these complications, Reed Smith recommends that companies:

  • review their contracts to determine what, if any, rights and remedies they have as a result of the delayed performance of contracts due to force majeure; 
  • provide timely notice of a force majeure event; 
  • prepare for potential litigation concerning failure-to-supply issues and the application of force majeure clauses, including by taking (and documenting) reasonable steps to mitigate the impact of the novel coronavirus; 
  • update form force majeure clauses to take into account, to the extent possible, modern risks to contractual performance, including diseases, epidemics or quarantines.

Reed Smith also noted that if a company intends use a force majeur clause to avoid financial penalties for business interruptions as a result of COVID-19, they should “take (and document) reasonable steps to mitigate the impact of the novel coronavirus. While these steps may prove futile, they are essential predicates to mounting a valid force majeure defense.”

There may also be insurance options for covering COVID-19-related losses. When speaking with the RIMScast podcast, Reed Smith’s Richard P. Lewis said that depending on a company’s exposures, some options for covering losses include contingent business interruption coverage, event cancellation policy, supply chain insurance or travel insurance. But, Lewis said, “The first big category would be first party insurance. That would be property insurance and more specifically a first party or property insurance policies providing ‘time element coverage’ that is impacted by time, usually known as business income or business interruption insurance.”

Lewis also said while property (like a factory that is shut down after the outbreak) may not have suffered actual physical damage, there could be legal precedent for claiming physical loss or damage “if the building can’t be used for its intended purpose.” Anderson Kill P.C.’s Finley T. Harckham also noted that in case law, people becoming sick on a property will not count as property damage, but contaminants at a property (including pathogens like COVID-19) could qualify.

U.S. companies, Lewis said, will be dealing with “contingent exposures, meaning the property affected is their customers’ or suppliers’ and not their own property.” However, if those companies have their own property, coverage is likely dependent on whether it was “closed by the order of a civil authority because of the actual presence of a virus and not the suspected presence of a virus.” Harckham noted that these restrictions would likely trigger civil authority coverage, which many insurance policies contain.

However companies attempt to cover their losses, Lewis recommended “Just make sure that if if this thing goes to court that you’re able to prove your losses. And that means to document them and to have witnesses who are able to explain what it is you lost and be able to testify at trial with that if it comes to that.”

To hear the full conversations with Hyzler and Lewis, listen to the RIMScast episode “What Risk Professionals Should Know About the Coronoavirus” here.

National Flood Insurance Program Set to Expire

Posted on by

As a tropical storm battered parts of Texas with more than 40 inches of rain in 72 hours last week, Congress is debating whether to extend the National Flood Insurance Program, which expires on September 30. The NFIP is a government-run flood insurance plan that covers 5 million policies and is an alternative to the relatively shallow private flood insurance market. Since the passage of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, Congress has often waited until the last minute to reauthorized the program before its expiration and passed only short-term extensions (12 since 2017).

Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution to keep the federal government funded through November 21 and prevent a government shutdown. This measure included an extension for the NFIP through the same date. But it is unclear whether the Senate will pass the resolution or allow a shutdown.

The House of Representatives Financial Services Committee unanimously passed a bill titled the National Flood Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2019 (H.R. 3167), which would reauthorize the NFIP for five years and provide funding for flood mapping and flood mitigation programs. It would also mandate a number of reforms, including allowing policyholders to get refunds if they cancel their policy before its expiration date, eliminating penalties if insureds leave the NFIP for the private market, and requiring the NFIP to increase premium rates each year.

On the Senate side, there is a bill of the same name that would also extend the NFIP for five years. The bills would also cap annual rate increases at 9% (as opposed to the current law, which allows increases by up to 25% annually), making the program more affordable, especially for low-income policyholders. Additionally, it includes provisions to protect homebuyers and renters by mandating flood risk and prior flood damage disclosures, and also funds flood mapping modernization and mitigation. As of this writing, the Senate has not voted on the measure.

Climate change has exacerbated annual flooding across the United States, making storms more violent, frequent and costly. In its June report on the flood outlook for 2019, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration noted that non-storm, high-tide flooding “is increasingly common due to years of relative sea level increases. It no longer takes a storm or a hurricane to cause flooding in many coastal areas.” And in May, NASA said that the United States had experienced record-setting precipitation, characterizing it as the “soggiest 12 months in 124 years of modern record-keeping.”

They also mean millions more in property damage, which in turn means more people getting payouts from the NFIP. In fact, the series of hurricanes that hit the United States in 2017 and 2018 also hit the NFIP hard—the program lost billions of dollars in payouts, leading the government to pass a disaster relief bill that helped the NFIP pay the claims. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which runs the NFIP, aims to double the number of people who have flood insurance by 2023, but according to E&E News analysis, coverage in the United States has declined by 31% since 2011, leaving many without protection if they are hit with flooding.

In 2012, Congress passed a law allowing federal agencies to begin accepting private flood policies, but the market has been sluggish to fill the gaps. Some are stepping in—indeed, the American Association of Insurance Services (AAIS) today announced a partnership with Munich Reinsurance America, Inc. (Munch Re) to provide flood insurance aimed at homeowners outside major flood zones. But with few other private insurance companies offering flood policies, if the NFIP is not reauthorized, this could leave more than half-a-million people across the country without coverage.