The comment stream

Recent comments

Reader poll

Should you fix your mortgage now or stay floating?

Choices

Insurers gain reasons to raise rates

Posted in Insurance

By John Grant

The Gulf of Mexico oil spill and the volcanic-ash disaster may prove relatively light in claims costs but may give insurers justification to raise premiums for some types of coverage.

The cost of cleaning up the Gulf of Mexico oil spill is going to be huge, and is likely to flow through to insurance premiums you pay here in New Zealand.

President Obama is reported to be seeking US$20 billion from BP for a fund to pay for the clean-up and compensate locals for their losses.

Insurers losses are also starting to mount and one re-insurer - Swiss Re has now estimated losses to be in excess of NZ$5.2b. JP Morgan have estimated losses of more than NZ$2.3b but conditioned this on it being based on oil not coming ashore. The owner of the rig that blew up has already received compensation in excess of NZ$700m.

The impact of the oil spill has already affected many businesses. For example the lucrative Louisiana shrimp industry has been shut down. The overall fishing operations in the Gulf have been significantly curtailed with 19% of the Gulf ruled off limits for fishing and that was back in mid May. Since then we have learned that 1m between 12000 and 15000 barrels a day are flowing into the Gulf and the spill is now covering an area of greater size than New Zealand.

Losses are covered by a variety of insurance policies already in force. Property and business interruption insurance provides coverage for certain losses. Liability insurance, both general liability and pollution liability policies, provide defense and indemnity for lawsuits.

Directors and officers insurance also will provide coverage for derivative lawsuits against directors and officers.

Losses from Liability insurance alone are likely to be very large. In early May over 70 claims had been lodged against the company responsible for damage for things such as businesses impacted and closed by the oil spill, clean up costs and a number of claims for those killed and injured in the explosion.

At the end of the day all claims lodged for Property and Business Interruption will end up being recovered from the Liability insurers.

Directors and officers of the companies that caused the damage are in the lawsuit frames as well. Actions have been filed in court against directors and officers. It is also expected that the claims lodged so far are just the tip of the iceberg. Dozens of such lawsuits are likely to follow, and the final cost is difficult to estimate.

Although there is little doubt that the impact of this environmental disaster will be felt by insurers and therefore consumers throughout the world, in fact the insurance industry may avoid most of the high-profile claims - it may be BP who pays the lion's share. The NZ$5 billion insurance estimate for this calamity is way below the NZ$59 billion that insurers had to pay for Hurricane Katrina.

Insurers may see opportunities in this disaster, and the Icelandic volcanic ash event. Some observers see them gaining reasons to raise rates, despite the claims from both events being relatively small.

 

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment in the box on the right or click on the "'Register" link at the bottom of the comments. Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making these comments.

8 Comments

Actual cost is estimated to

Actual cost is estimated to exceed 1 trillion dollars. It is turning in world's biggest ecological disaster. BP can't stop it, will dry out in about two months and then Obama and BP will claim big victory

1m barrels a day?? Really? In

1m barrels a day?? Really?

In terms of ecological disasters, you could probably argue that the ice ages, asteroid strike(s) that ended the dominance of the dinosaurs etc. were more devastating, although on a flip side open up a whole lot of space for new species to evolve into.

Not to say that I don't find this whole episode pretty abhorant and reading any of the conjecture on why and how it happened, so tragically unecessary.

"team of U.S. scientists on

"team of U.S. scientists on Tuesday upped their high-end estimate of the amount of
crude oil flowing from BP Plc's stricken Gulf of Mexico well by 50 percent, the second major upward revision in less than a week.

The scientists said the "most likely flow rate of oil today" ranges from 35,000 to 60,000 barrels (1.47 million and 2.52 million gallons/5.57 million and 9.54 million liters) per day."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyVB62gMMs4

As I wrote earlier this event will lead to worldwide dramatic consequences soon.

WK

The amount of oil is huge, if

The amount of oil is huge, if BP is unable to stop a leak because it is so very deep maybe these companies should only be allowed to drill no deeper than man can safely work at.

It is true that companies

It is true that companies should only be allowed to drill in water they can safely work in. But the trouble is that in the US the Green/Democrat lobby has effectively stopped all drilling on land and in the shallow water areas.Thus and as America still wants oil firms are compelled to drill further out. The latest knee jerk reaction a stop on all deep water drilling, I suppose they will want BP to cover the wages etc lost due to this action as well.

But more fundamentally it was an American owned rig, using American crew and with America equipment that failed.

Obama calls on BP to suspend its dividend pay out hence another whole in the UK tax revenue - why I ask, could it be that this time the "Great Dreamer" can suck up the money with a straw?

It is likely that the insurance companies will argue the liability amount question for years. Obama will use it as yet another political point to push his pipe dream agenda of green energy. China will buy BP using America $ debt. Hopefully Obama will be a one term president.

But as he said and like most of America's comments it isn't anti British, well that's ok then. Next time he ask for more UK troops in Iraq or Afghanistan the "on you bike answer" will not be anti American either just a case of a genuine well meaning difference of opinion.

And America wonders why they are so disliked?????

Government agencies under

Government agencies under both Bush and Obama pushed for the expansion of deep-sea oil drilling, as oil industry spent $174 million last year alone on lobbying the federal government.Members of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee received an average of about $52,000 from individuals and groups associated with the oil and gas industry this election cycle. 78 percent of House members and 84 percent of Senators received funding from oil and gas this past election cycle,Democratic Senator Blanche Lincoln (Arkansas) leads the way with over $280,000 collected ...

The Obama administration

The Obama administration appointed Sylvia Baca, a BP executive, to serve as a Deputy Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management. Baca was appointed last June by Obama’s Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, who himself has extensive ties to the oil industry and has long promoted off-shore oil drilling.

Bush administration Interior Secretary Gale Norton, after leaving the government took a position as general counsel for Royal Dutch Shell.

Outside the Interior Department, Obama’s Energy Secretary, Steven Chu, headed a research institute at the University of California, Berkeley, which was funded by BP with a $500 million grant. On becoming Energy Secretary, Chu selected BP’s chief scientist, Steven Koonin, to be the DOE undersecretary for science.