Regulators

Rate Filing Review

Pinnacle typically provides state regulators expert review of company and bureau rate change filings. In a recent review of a Company’s automobile rate filing Pinnacle was able to confirm that the filed rates met the State’s rating laws and Department’s filing requirements. Using a procedure developed by Pinnacle specifically to review rate filings, the Company filing was reviewed against generally accepted actuarial principles. The Company was questioned on certain rating procedures and was able to support their procedures and selections with additional documentation to the filing. Pinnacle was then able to affirm to the Regulator that the filed rates were not excessive, inadequate, nor unfairly discriminatory and that the new rates would not produce any major policyholder dislocations. The Regulator was then able to acknowledge the Company’s filing with confidence that the Regulator had carried out his charge of providing service and protection both to consumers and to the insurance industry.

U S Domestic Statement of Actuarial Opinion

Domestic U.S. property/casualty insurers and risk retention groups are required to file an Annual Statement with state regulators each year by March 1. Part of that filing includes the submission of a formal Statement of Actuarial Opinion (SAO) by a qualified Appointed Actuary as to the reasonableness of held loss and loss adjustment expense reserves. The SAO must be one of five types:

• Reasonable
• Inadequate/Deficient
• Excessive/Redundant
• Qualified
• No Opinion

In addition to the SAO, most jurisdictions require an Actuarial Opinion Summary (AOS) providing more detail on the Appointed Actuary’s specific findings by March 15. Lastly, a formal report narrative in support of the SAO and AOS is required to be available by May 1.

As the SAO is a compliance document, the primary audience is state regulators but the individual company must arrange for the service to be provided.

A recent SAO for one of our clients touched on many of the required disclosures:

1. The adequacy of held reserves on a net basis were below the low end of our range of reasonable reserves until we took into account anticipated salvage and subrogation recoveries.
2. The unearned premium reserves for long duration contracts were substantial and we conducted a review to determine they were adequate
3. The Company held material loss and loss adjustment expense reserves for pools and associations. In order avoid having to issue a Qualified Opinion, we separately computed indicated reserves for two of the pools/associations, and obtained an SAO from the Appointed Actuary for the National Workers Compensation Reinsurance Pool.
4. Reinsurance recoveries were in doubt for certain carriers as balance were sometimes overdue by more than 90 days. After reviewing the reinsurers’ A. M. Best ratings, we made the required disclosures about reinsurance collectability. 

Workers' Compensation

Pinnacle was retained by a major national political organization to investigate the impact of several workers compensation reforms including: implementation of mandatory managed care, privatization of state workers compensation insurance funds and the permitting of private insurers to enter previously monopolistic workers compensation states. Our analysis looked at state-level differences in rate levels, insurer experience, coverage competition, the mix of medical and indemnity claims and numerous other metrics. The study was extremely well received and ultimately presented to more than half of the nation’s governors.