Future Focus 2015 Contribution: Executive Director Malcolm Hyde BSC (Hons) Dip FR Fcii Fcila Fifaa

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 16

Future Focus 2015

Contribution
Executive Director Malcolm Hyde
BSc (Hons) Dip Fr FCII FCILA FIFAA
What we will be exploring
• Definition of Contribution
• Case law and statute law
• Understand why it is important
• Methods of apportioning the loss
• Certificate, C1 and C2 questions
• What answers should include
Contribution is:
• Marine Insurance Act 1906 Section 32 – Double Insurance
(1) “Where two or more policies are effected by or on behalf of the
assured on the same adventure and interest or any part thereof,
and the sums insured exceed the indemnity allowed by this Act,
the assured is said to be over-insured by double insurance.”

• Marine Insurance Act 1906 Section 32 – Double Insurance


(2)(a) “The assured, unless the policy otherwise provides, may
claim payment from the insurers in such order as he may
think fit…”
Contribution is:
Marine Insurance Act 1906 Section 32 – Double Insurance
(2)(b)“Where the policy under which the assured claims is a valued
policy, the assured must give credit as against the valuation for
any sum received by him under any other policy without regard
to the actual value of the subject-matter insured.”

Marine Insurance Act 1906 Section 32 – Double Insurance


(2)(c)“Where the policy under which the assured claims is an unvalued
policy he must give credit, as against the full insurable value, for
any sum received by him under any other policy”.
Contribution is:
• Marine Insurance Act 1906 Section 32 – Double Insurance
(2)(d)“Where the assured receives any sum in excess of the
indemnity allowed by this Act, he is deemed to hold such sum
in trust for the insurers, according to their right of contribution
among themselves.”

• Requirements for Contribution


1. The same subject matter
2. The same interest
3. The same peril/risk
Same interest
• North British & Mercantile Insurance Co v London Liverpool and
Globe Insurance Co (1877)

• Where the interest was not the same (in this case owner and Bailee)
Contribution did not arise…
• No Cover? (Insurers modify the position)

• Weddell v Road Traffic and General Insurance Co (1932)

• Two policies both excluding liability if another existed – held that both
policies were liable
Rateable proportion
Legal and General v Drake Insurance Co 1992
• No right of recovery where whole claim paid despite rateable proportion
clause.

Drake v Provident Insurance Plc 2004


• There was a right of recovery – seemingly because the first insurer paid
under protest
Methods of apportionment

A. Maximum liability method


B. Independent liability basis

Which method to use?


A. Average does not apply use Maximum liability basis
B. Average does apply use Independent liability basis
Maximum Liability Method
Shared by the Insurers in proportion to the total of all actual liabilities

Insurer A Sum Insured £10,000


Insurer B Sum Insured £20,000
Loss £6,000

Insurer A pays
£10,000 x £6000 = £2,000
£30,000

Insurer B pays
£20,000 x £6,000 = £4,000
£30,000
Independent Liability Method
• Assess the liability for each Insurer as though its
policy was the only one in force

• The figure which results in each case represents the


independent liability of the Insurer for the loss

• The loss is then shared in proportion to the


independent liabilities of the Insurers
Example
Policy A Sum Insured £10,000
Policy B Sum Insured £20,000
Loss £15,000
(Not subject to average)

Step 1 calculate the independent liability of Policy A


This is £10,000

Step 2 calculate independent liability of policy B


This is £15,000

Step 3 the loss is shared in proportion to the two independent liabilities


A pays £10,000 x £15,000 = £6,000
£ 25,000

B pays £15,000 x £15,000 -= £9,000


£25,000
Independent Liability Method

• Policy A Sum Insured £10,000

• Policy B Sum Insured £15,000

• Full Value Sum Insured £20,000

• Loss £5,000
Certificate
Contribution is:
• An interim payment to share the burden of the loss
• The right to seek a recovery to share the loss
• The excess paid by the policyholder to share the loss
• Where Insurers share a loss they both cover
C1
• Provide the definition of Contribution,
explain the principle providing statute and
case law as appropriate.

• Group work
C2
Frank Zappa insures his musical instruments against the risk of Fire with
RT Insurance Company. The policy is in force from 1st Jan 2015 to 31st
Dec 2015 He also takes out an “All Risk” policy with AD Insurance
Company covering the same goods with cover effective from 1st March
2015 to 29th February 2016. Average applies to both policies.
On the 1st September his Fender American Standard Strat HSS
Shawbucker, RW, 3-Color Sunburst guitar is damaged by fire. The total
value of the guitar and agreed loss is £1,200.
Frank realises he is insured twice and as the Loss Adjuster you are
handling the claim. Explain the legal considerations that arise with regard
to the double insurance and explain the basis upon which you should settle
the claim. Detail how the position would be different if the loss took place
on 2nd Jan 2016 and was for damage as the guitar had been dropped.
Future Focus 2015
Contribution
Executive Director Malcolm Hyde
BSc (Hons) Dip Fr FCII FCILA FIFAA

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy