Robert J. Walling III

Medical Malpractice Damage Caps

A state insurance regulator asked Pinnacle to determine the potential impact of several proposed tort reforms, including a change to non-economic damage caps for medical professional liability claims. Pinnacle worked with medical society to identify the most appropriate claims databases for assessing the potential legislative change. Our detailed analysis not only considered data from that state, but several others to stress test the results and provide a range of reasonable outcomes. In many cases, the specific reform’s effect, for example “I’m Sorry” legislation, was very difficult to isolate. Through this industry analysis, we identified differences well beyond a simple loss limitation to provide a more complete review of potential environmental changes that could be expected in the state.

This comprehensive analysis helped our client identify the effect of various legislative options, which empowered them to be a strong voice in the legislative debate and to influence policymaking in the state.

Product Development

Pinnacle was retained to develop a long haul trucking pricing model for risks with more than 100 powered units. Using publicly available information, a model that incorporated elements of both exposure and experience rating was developed that incorporated differences in geographic location, cargo and trailer type, radius of operations, driver characteristics, prior claims experience, prior insurer, self insured retention, driver characteristics and several other elements. The program was implemented and has become an essential part of a very successful program.

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.