|
by
Jim Harris, AIA
In our collective annual survey of architect/engineer professional liability
insurance carriers, the AIA Risk Management Committee, American Council
of Engineering Companies, and National Society of Professional Engineers/Professional
Engineers in Private Practice Professional Liability Committee received
responses from 13 of the largest insurance carriers currently offering
professional liability coverage for architects and engineers in the U.S.
The multidisciplinary survey panel invited 10 of the insurance companies
to attend interviews with AIA, NSPE, and ACEC representatives to provide
clarification and offer further information. The interviews, held on
September 30 in Chicago, revealed a number of trends crucial to firm
planning for the coming year.
Comments and observations
- The good
news is that after three years of significant rate increases across
the board, most of the insurance companies interviewed this year reported
that they expect rates to stabilize and remain steady for 2005.
- According
to the insurers, a key reason that architects and engineers experienced
such large rate increases over the last three years was due to
the significant drop in investment income that the insurance companies
were able to earn on the premium dollars during that period. The reduction
of that investment income required the insurance companies to raise
the rates on the policies. Most of the insurance companies report this
year that they believe that the rates are in balance with their claims
and their investment income.
- Several insurance companies reported that they
have excess capacity, and that they are aggressively looking to
write new policies.
- Most of the companies reported that the frequency of claims
is holding steady, but some maintained that the severity or size
of claims is rising.
- A number of insurance companies are interested in writing
professional liability insurance for architects and engineers at
this time, although these companies continue to shift, merge, and realign.
Some of recent changes include:
—The discontinuation of underwriting activities in this market by DPIC,
and XL Insurance’s expansion of its market share with its purchase
of the renewal rights to DPIC’s book of business
—The discontinuation of underwriting activities in this market by Kemper
Insurance, with its business largely assumed by St. Paul
—The termination of the underwriting relationship between Arrowhead
Design Insurance and Liberty International Underwriters
—The termination of the underwriting relationship between RA&MCO
and the Great American Insurance Companies, and the acquisition of RA&MCO
by HCC Insurance Holdings, Inc.
- A few of the insurance companies report
that they have expanded their interest in writing policies for
design/builders and construction managers, in addition to architects
and engineers.
- Over
the last few years, a number of professional liability insurance
companies have filed mold exclusions with state insurance commissions
in the event that they might choose to make them a part of their policies
in the future. The majority of the insurance interviewees stated that
they have not experienced the level of claims that would necessitate
their actually activating that exclusion in their policies.
- Many of the
insurance companies interviewed did express concern over the amount
of claims resulting from condominium projects, as well as residential
projects in general. Several companies reported that they exercise
strict underwriting guidelines for architects and engineers whose practice
includes a significant amount of condominium work or other residential
projects.
- Almost
all of the insurance companies reported that they will write no
(or only limited) project-specific policies, but several companies
stated that they do still write surplus coverage for specific projects
for existing policy holders.
- Almost all of the insurance companies reported that
they encourage “incident
reporting.” They also encourage their policyholders to use their
contract review services as well as any pre-claim assistance that the
company is willing to offer. Each maintained that the early report of
an incident or potential claim does not adversely affect the insurer’s
rate unless an actual claim is filed and money is paid toward the claim.
In conclusion, the rate increases in recent years coupled with the expansion
in the number of insurance companies offering professional liability
insurance coverage to design professionals has created a very competitive
and aggressive market. Depending on the size of the firm, your claims
history, and your tolerance for risk, there are many options and choices
to consider. In good markets or bad, an experienced broker who specializes
in professional liability insurance for design professionals remains
your best resource whether you are in the process of buying your first
policy or renewing your existing policy.
Copyright 2004 The American Institute of Architects.
All rights reserved. Home Page
|
|
|
|
For more
information on managing risk and the Risk Management Committee,
visit the AIA’s Risk Management Resource Center on AIA.org.
The insurance companies interviewed were:
• Euclid Managers for National
Casualty Company and Scottsdale Insurance Company
• Insight Insurance
Services, for Everest National Insurance Company
• Lexington Insurance
Company
• Liberty International Underwriters,
for the Liberty Mutual Group
• Beasley’s, for Lloyds of London
• RA&MCO, for HCC Insurance
Holdings
• St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company
• State Farm Fire and
Casualty Company
• Victor O. Schinnerer & Company, for Continental
Casualty Co. (CNA Insurance)
• XL Insurance/XL Design Professional.
(The insurance-firm interviewers
are also appreciative of survey responses from ACE USA, Arrowhead,
and AVRECO, but, due to time limitations, the panel was unable
to interview these three insurance providers this year.)
For a summary of survey results click here.
Jim Harris is a national studio principal at Little Diversified
Architectural Consultants in Charlotte and a member of the AIA
Risk Management Committee.
|
|
|
|
|
|