Monthly Archives: January 2025

Insurance News, Legal Environment

Florida’s Progress
in Legal Reform:
A Model for 2025

Leave a comment

Florida’s legal system reforms, aimed at curbing frivolous lawsuits and unfair liability divisions, are showing early signs of success, according to a recent study from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform.

The historic reform legislation passed in 2022 and 2023 has led to insurance carriers expanding their business in Florida, and homeowner insurance rates are either stabilizing or decreasing.

Key reforms passed by state lawmakers include:

  • Florida Senate Bill 2A (2022): Eliminated one-way attorney fees and assignment of benefits for property insurance claims.
  • Florida HB 1205 (2023): Prohibits misleading legal service ads and the misuse of consumer health information for legal services.
  • Florida Supreme Court (2024): Requires discovery to be proportional to case needs.
  • Florida HB 837 (2023):
    • Adopts modified comparative fault.
    • Limits plaintiff recovery over 50% fault.
    • Protects multi-family owners from third-party crime liability.
    • Restricts bad faith insurance claims.
    • Limits medical damages to actual payments with required disclosures.

Florida reforms in 2022 have also addressed the issue of fraudulent assignment of benefits (AOB) claims. A recent court ruling upheld Senate Bill 2A, confirming that a “direction to pay” (DTP) is not an AOB and third parties lack standing to sue insurers without a valid AOB.

Despite facing opposition from the well-funded billboard trial lobby, the reforms have led to a reduction in property insurance lawsuits and stabilized rates. However, the problem of opportunistic trial attorneys driving up frivolous lawsuits for profit persists, emphasizing the need for insurers and businesses to adapt their risk management strategies in 2025.

Looking ahead, Florida lawmakers in 2025 are expected to reintroduce a bill requiring more transparency for third-party litigation funding (TPLF) during the 2025 legislative session, according to the Florida Chamber of Commerce. This is seen as another crucial step in the reform of Florida’s legal system.

“Legislative reforms have vastly improved Florida’s property insurance market. Any efforts to roll back the reforms previously passed would have a negative impact on the market’s continued path toward stability,” said Mark Friedlander, Triple-I’s Florida-based director of corporate communications.

The reforms have led to a significant drop in property claims lawsuits, better loss ratios for insurers, a manageable hurricane season, billions in new capital, and a projected reduction in reinsurance prices for 2025 following flattened rates in 2024. These developments underscore the effectiveness of the reforms and the potential for further improvement in the insurance market.

For a deeper understanding of the implications of TPLF and the ongoing legislative efforts, we invite you to explore Triple-I’s comprehensive TPLF white paper and visit our legal system abuse knowledge hub. You can also check out our new StopLegalSystemAbuse.org microsite.

Business Risk, Catastrophes, Cyber Risk, Disaster Resilience, Floods, Life Insurance

Executive Exchange: RiskScan Survey Taps Cross-Market Viewpoints

Leave a comment

For insurers, “customer” is one word that encompasses individual policyholders, business owners, risk managers, agents and brokers, and others, all with different (often divergent) priorities. For reinsurers – whose primary customers are insurers themselves – “understanding the customer” is particularly challenging.

This was part of the motivation behind RiskScan 2024 – a collaborative survey carried out by Munich Re US and Triple-I. The survey provides a cross-market overview of top risk concerns among individuals across five key market segments: P&C insurance carriers, P&C agents and brokers, middle-market business decision makers, small business owners, and consumers. It explores not only P&C risks, but also how economic, political, and legal pressures shape risk perceptions. 

“I get very excited when we have a chance to be in our customers’ shoes,” said Kerri Hamm, EVP and head of cyber underwriting, client solutions, and business development at Munich Re US, in a recent Executive Exhange interview with Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan. “To really understand how they feel about a broad range of issues from what are their most important risks to how they feel about the cost of insurance and the economic environment.”

 Hamm discussed how more than one-third of respondents ranked economic inflation, cyber risk, and climate change as top concerns, identifying them as “increasing or resulting in rises of the cost of insurance.”

“When we really understand what our customers want, we can design a better product and think about whether the coverages we’re providing are meaningful to them,” Hamm said. “That can help us match pricing better to their expectations.”

One result that Hamm found “surprising” was that “legal system abuse” didn’t appear to be as widely accepted by respondents – apart from the insurance professionals – as driving up insurance costs. Kevelighan cited other research – including by Triple-I’s sister organization, the Insurance Research Council – that has found consumers to be aware of the growing influence of “billboard attorneys”.

Unfortunately, he said, “They don’t seem to be making the connection with how that’s affecting them. What we’re trying to do at Triple-I is to help them make that connection.”

Kevelighan talked about Triple-I’s education campaign around “the billboard effect” in Georgia. That campaign includes an actual billboard (“Trying to fight fire with fire,” he said), as well as a microsite called Stop Legal System Abuse. The campaign focuses on Georgia because the state tops the most recent list of places that the American Tort Reform Foundation calls “judicial hellholes”. 

“We’re trying to help citizens in Georgia see that this is costing you,” Kevelighan said, adding that Triple-I has seen high engagement through the program with people in the state.

Learn More:

Triple-I “State of the Risk” Issues Brief: Legal System Abuse (Members only)

Triple-I Launches Campaign to Highlight Challenges to Insurance Affordability in Georgia

Louisiana Reforms: Progress, But More Is Needed to Stem Legal System Abuse

JIF 2024: What’s In a Name? When It Comes to Legal System Abuse, A Lot

Climate Resilience and Legal System Abuse Take Center Stage in Miami

Agents Play Critical Role in Navigating Impacts of Legal System Abuse on Customers

Legal System Abuse/Social Inflation Adds Costs and Challenges for US Casualty Insurance: AM Best

Who’s Financing Legal System Abuse? Louisianans Need to Know

Auto Insurance, Homeowners Insurance, Legal Environment, Market Conditions

Louisiana Reforms: Progress, But More
Is Needed to Stem
Legal System Abuse

Leave a comment

Reforms put in place in 2024 are a positive move toward repairing Louisiana’s insurance market, which has long suffered from excessive claims litigation and attorney involvement that drive up costs and, ultimately, premium rates.

But more work is needed, Triple-I says in its latest Issues Brief.

Research by the Insurance Research Council (IRC) – like Triple-I, an affiliate of The Institutes – shows Louisiana to be among the least affordable states for both personal auto and homeowners insurance.

In 2022, the average annual personal auto premium expenditure per vehicle in Louisiana was $1,588, which is nearly 40 percent above the national average and nearly double that of the lowest-cost Southern state of North Carolina ($840), IRC said. Louisianans also pay significantly more for homeowners coverage than the rest of the nation, with an average annual expenditure of $2,178, representing 3.81 percent of the median household income in the state – 54 percent above the national average.

Louisiana’s low average personal income relative to the rest of the nation contributes to its personal auto insurance affordability challenges, which are exacerbated by its litigation environment.

Louisiana Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple has championed a series of legislative changes that he has said will encourage insurers to return to Louisiana, especially in hurricane-prone areas.

“There are fewer companies willing to write property insurance in Louisiana, and that’s a lot of what our legislation is designed to do,” Temple said. “To help promote Louisiana and change the marketplace so that companies feel like they are going to be treated fairly.”

In June 2024, Gov. Landry signed into law S.B. 355, which puts limitations on third-party litigation funding – a practice in which investors, with no stake in claims apart from potentially lucrative settlements, fund lawsuits aimed at entities perceived as having deep pockets. Third-party litigation funding drives up claims costs and delays settlements, which end up being passed along to consumers in the form of higher premiums.

This progress was undermined when Landry vetoed H.B. 423, which would have reformed the state’s “collateral source doctrine” that allows civil juries to have access to the “sticker price” of medical bills and the amount actually paid by the insurance company.

“In addition to creating more transparency and helping lower insurance rates, this bill would have brought more fairness and balance to our civil justice system,” said Lana Venable, director of Louisiana Lawsuit Abuse Watch in a statement regarding the veto. “Lawsuit abuse does not discriminate – everyone pays the price when the resulting costs are passed down to all of us.”

Continued reforms in 2025 will be necessary to help prevent legal system abuse and promote a more competitive insurance market that leads to greater affordability for consumers, Triple-I says in its brief.

Learn More:

Louisiana Is Least Affordable State for Personal Auto Coverage Across the South and U.S.

Despite Improvements, Louisiana Is Still Least Affordable State for Auto Insurance

Who’s Financing Legal System Abuse? Louisianans Need to Know

Louisiana Litigation Funding Reform Vetoed; AOB Ban, Insurer Incentive Boost Make It Into Law

Louisiana’s Insurance Woes Worsen as Florida Works to Fix Its Problems

Hurricanes Drive Louisiana Insured Losses, Insurer Insolvencies

Auto Insurance, Homeowners Insurance, Technology

Human Needs Drive Insurance and Should Drive Tech Solutions

Leave a comment

By Lewis Nibbelin, Contributing Writer, Triple-I

Maintaining human centricity in an increasingly digitized world was a focus of discussion for many participants at Triple-I’s 2024 Joint Industry Forum (JIF) – particularly during the “Fireside Chat,” featuring Katherine Horowitz, executive vice president and head of business units for The Institutes, and Casey Kempton, president of personal lines at Nationwide.

As generative AI and other technological innovations help streamline the insurance value chain, such processes must continue to align with the human needs intrinsic to insurance, Kempton stressed.

“Insurance is a human business,” Kempton said. “The moment of a claim – of whatever tragedy or inconvenience that has happened – is a human moment. Theres’s emotion involved in that. I don’t expect any robot or machine to take on that experience end-to-end and be able to deliver what folks need in that moment, which is comfort and assurance.”

Rather, new technology presents opportunities to facilitate more proactive and individualized risk management than ever before, while also enabling employees to do what this industry does best: engaging with other people.

Role of telematics

Usage-based insurance, for instance, allows insurers to tailor auto rates based on the policyholder’s driving behavior, tracked by telematics. By providing feedback to encourage safer driving habits, telematics has been found to lower risk and reduce auto premiums, empowering consumers to recognize their direct influence on their insurance rates, Kempton said.

Similarly, advanced smart devices – such as those developed by Whisker Labs (Ting) and Ondo InsurTech (LeakBot) – continuously detect conditions that could lead to damage within a home and notify homeowners before losses occur. The success of these devices has spurred numerous insurance carriers, including Nationwide, to pay for and distribute them to customers.

“Supporting the delivery of these technologies to our customers is critical,” Kempton explained, as is “making the cost of entry accessible.”

Words matter

Kempton noted that mitigative insurance solutions further serve to alleviate widespread public distrust in the industry, which has become “sullied” under misconceptions of insurance as merely a commodity.

Industry language fixated on costs, rather than consumer needs, is partly to blame.

“In insurance, we talk about ‘mitigating loss,’” Kempton said. “That’s how it feels from our perspective – we see claims as losses – but let’s turn that into, ‘how can [insurers] better engender peace of mind and protection for consumers?’”

Louisiana Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple later echoed this sentiment during a panel on legal system abuse, discussing how “billboard attorney” advertising has appropriated the consumer confidence once placed in insurance carriers.

“I remember when insurance companies advertised dependability and stability,” Temple explained. “Now it’s lizards, birds, and jingles… And then you see the attorneys, and they talk about how you’re going to be safe and secure with their service. That’s [the insurance company’s] job.”

Fueled by such advertising, excessive claims-related litigation has cost residents of Louisiana and other states across the country  thousands of dollars in “tort taxes” every year, contributing to rising premium rates as insurers struggle to predict and mitigate protracted claims disputes. Lack of transparency around third-party litigation funding (TPLF), in which investors fund lawsuits in exchange for a percentage of any settlement, exacerbates this financial strain.

“If we can avoid these additional expenses and the severity attached to nuclear verdicts, it benefits all consumers,” Kempton said. Recent reforms in Florida – once the poster child for legal system abuse – indicate as much.

But reform necessarily hinges on collaboration between all stakeholders, which is unattainable without resolving “the consumer mindset we’ve inadvertently created around what the value of insurance is,” Kempton said. Updated legal regulations are equally important to ending legal system abuse as reasserting the key values of insurers – to protect and care for policyholders.

Industry Financials, Insurers and the Economy, Market Conditions

P&C Underwriting Profitability Prospects for 2024 Remain Firm

Leave a comment

By William Nibbelin, Senior Research Actuary, Triple-I

The U.S. Property & Casualty insurance market is expected to continue its trajectory of improving underwriting results in 2024 into 2025 and 2026, according to the latest projections by actuaries at Triple-I and Milliman. The latest report – Insurance Economics and Underwriting Projections: A Forward View – was released during Triple-I’s January 16 members-only webinar.

Year-over-year gains in net written premium increases and quarter-over-quarter loss ratios are primarily due to better-than-expected Q3 performance in personal auto.

The 2024 underlying economic growth for P&C ended slightly below U.S. GDP growth at 2.3 percent versus 2.5 percent year over year. A further economic milestone occurred in 2024, with the number of people employed in the U.S. insurance industry surpassing three million.

Michel Léonard, Ph.D., CBE, chief economist and data scientist at Triple-I, noted P&C underlying economic growth is expected to remain above overall GDP growth in 2025 (2.3 percent versus 2.1 percent) and 2026 (2.6 percent versus 2.0 percent) as lower interest rates continue to revive real estate and contribute to higher volume for homeowners’ insurance and commercial property.

“This is an improvement on our 2025 P&C underlying growth expectations from second half of 2024,” Léonard said. “The pace of increase in P&C replacement costs is expected to overtake overall inflation in 2025 (3.3 percent versus 2.5 percent). This aligns with our earlier expectations from the second half of last year.”

Personal vs. commercial lines performance

The 2024 net combined ratio for the P&C industry is projected to be 99.5, a year-over-year improvement of 2.2 points, with a net written premium (NWP) growth rate of 9.5 percent. Combined ratio is a standard measure of underwriting profitability, in which a result below 100 represents a profit and one above 100 represents a loss. Personal lines 2024 net combined ratio estimates improved by nearly 1 point, while the commercial lines 2024 estimates worsened by 1.2 points.

Dale Porfilio, FCAS, MAAA, Triple-I’s chief insurance officer, expanded upon the dichotomy of commercial and personal lines results.

“Commercial lines continue to have better underwriting results than personal lines, but the gap is closing,” Porfilio said. “The impact from natural catastrophes such as Hurricane Helene in Q3 2024 and Hurricane Milton in Q4 2024 significantly impacted commercial property. The substantial rate increases necessary to offset inflationary pressures on losses have driven the improved results in personal auto and homeowners.”

Personal auto and homeowners are each projected to have improved 6.1 points over 2023, with a 2024 net combined ratio of 98.8 and 104.8, respectively. NWP growth rate for personal lines is expected to surpass commercial lines by 9 points in 2024, with personal auto leading at 14.0 percent, the second highest in over 15 years.

Jason B. Kurtz, FCAS, MAAA, a principal and consulting actuary at Milliman – a premier global consulting and actuarial firm – elaborated on profitability concerns within commercial lines.

“Commercial auto continues to remain unprofitable,” he said. “The 2024 direct incurred loss ratio through Q3 is only marginally improved relative to 2023 and is the second highest in over 15 years.”

Hurricane Milton is projected to be the worst catastrophic event for commercial property since Hurricane Ian in 2022 Q3, driving higher-than-expected losses and subsequently increasing the commercial property projected 2024 net combined ratio up 3.3 points to 91.2, which is also 3.3 points worse than 2023. During the webinar, commercial property forecasts were also shared for the fire and allied and inland marine sub-lines.

Continued worsening in general liability

General liability’s projected 2024 net combined ratio of 103.7 is 3.6 points worse than actual 2023 experience. Kurtz said the line has seen significantly worsening, with each quarterly loss ratio in 2024 worse than 2023 year over year.

“The 2024 direct incurred loss ratio through Q3 is the highest in over 15 years,” Kurtz said. “As a result, we have increased our expectations for 2025 and 2026 net written premium growth, as the industry responds to the worsening 2024 performance.”

Continuing the discussion on general liability, Emma Stewart, FIA, chief actuary at Lloyds added that U.S. general liability has experienced material deterioration in loss ratios and a slowing down of claims development.

“A large driver of this has been the post-underwriting emergence of heightened social inflation, or more specifically, legal system abuse and nuclear verdicts,” Stewart said. “If these trends continue to increase, reserves on this class can be expected to deteriorate further.”

Workers comp loss-cost preview

Ending with workers compensation, Donna Glenn, FCAS, MAAA, chief actuary at the National Council on Compensation Insurance, provided a preview of this year’s average loss-cost changes and discussed the long-term financial health of the workers compensation system. 

“The 2025 average loss cost decrease of 6 percent is moderate, which will inevitably have implications on the overall net written premium change,” Glenn said.  She added that the –6 percent average loss cost level change in 2025 is notably different than the -9 percent average seen in 2024, the largest average decrease since before the pandemic.

“Payroll for 2025 will develop throughout the year resulting from both wage and employment levels.  Therefore, overall premium will become clearer as the year progresses,” she said.

Homeowners Insurance, Insurance Industry

New IRC report indicates that Most Homeowners Expect to Experience Severe Weather in Future and Feel Prepared. 

Leave a comment

While the perception of overall severe weather risks varies significantly by region, 65 percent of the participants nationwide believed their home is at risk from thunderstorms, according to the new report, Catastrophic Weather Events and Mitigation: Survey of Homeowners by the Insurance Research Council (IRC), a division of The Institutes. 

Overall, this and other key report findings revolve around the value of proactive measures for effective preparedness and mitigation strategies to address the increasing risks posed by severe weather events and the need for collaboration between homeowners, insurers, and governments to enhance resilience against natural disasters. The report highlights how interactions with contractors, public adjusters, and attorney involvement can significantly impact recovery timelines, claims frequency, and insurance costs. 

The online survey of over 1,500 respondents investigates U.S. public opinions and homeowners’ experiences with severe weather, offering insights on U.S. regional perceptions of future risks, preparedness levels, attitudes toward mitigation strategies, post-storm solicitations by contractors and service providers, and homeowners; opinions on the roles of insurance and government in managing severe weather-related risks.  

Disaster anticipation and preparedness 

Eighty percent of the responding homeowners expressed confidence in their preparedness for severe weather events. Homeowners participating in the survey who experienced severe weather events in the past five years were significantly more likely to believe that a similar event would occur within the next five years.  

Only 30 percent are aware of premium savings for implementing mitigation measures. However, Eighty-three percent of participants said they would consider implementing catastrophe preparedness and mitigation measures if it meant receiving savings on their insurance premiums, but most of those required premium savings large enough to offset the costs of these measures. Seventy percent revealed they would be willing to pay higher premiums for better protection against future severe weather events. Overall, 80 percent agreed that the government should provide emergency assistance.  

Weather Experiences 

Nearly half of the participants reported damage to their homes after a severe weather event. About 34 percent said they filed an insurance claim after experiencing damage to their homes, and 45 percent said they hired a contractor. Sixty-four percent of respondents reported receiving solicitation from contractors after a severe weather event. Also, 68 percent of participants who filed claims said they used Assignment of Benefits (AOB) to authorize the repair company to bill the insurance carrier. Fifty-four percent reported hiring public adjusters to handle repairs and insurance claims.  

For context, each year, there are about 100,000 thunderstorms in the U.S., about 10% of which reach severe levels, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Storms are classified as severe “ when containing one or more of the following: hail one inch or greater, winds gusting more than 50 knots (57.5 mph), or a tornado.” Data analysis from Munich Re indicates that by just the first six months of 2024, severe thunderstorms in the U.S. caused $45 billion in losses, $34 billion of which were insured, making 2024 the fourth-costliest thunderstorm year on record.  

Between 1980 and 2024 (as of November 1), the U.S. experienced 400 weather and climate disasters, with overall damage costs for each reaching or exceeding $1 billion. The cumulative cost for these 400 events exceeds $2.78 trillion. The yearly average for events during this period is 8.5, with the annual average for 2019 –2023 being 20.4. However, the U.S. experienced 28 events in 2023 and 27 events in 2024 costing at least 1 billion dollars each. 

Stakeholder Takeaways 

While climate risk plays a significant role in the number and severity of extreme weather events that cause insurance industry losses, Triple-I has kept an eye on the impact of the unpredictable confluence of attorney fee mechanisms, assignment of benefits (AOB), and other practices that can amplify claim costs. For example, involving third parties has the propensity to introduce the risk of claim inflation and may compound issues for the policyholder.  

When property owners are compelled to share their claim value (typically 30 – 40 percent to attorneys and 10 – 30 percent to public adjusters), this, in turn, may impact the final amount they feel necessary to settle a claim. Previous IRC research suggests that attorney involvement can increase claims costs and the time needed to resolve them (again, even while reducing value for claimants). Additionally, after a severe weather event, some exploitative actors can aggressively leverage assignment of benefits (AOBs) agreements to bill or even sue the insurer without further input from the policyholder. Policyholders lose the ability to work through and settle the claim efficiently. 

Triple-I and key insurance industry stakeholders define legal system abuse as policyholder or plaintiff attorney practices that increase costs and time to settle insurance claims, including situations when a disputed claim could have been fairly resolved without judicial intervention. Without measures such as regulatory intervention and increased policyholder awareness, coverage affordability and availability are at risk. Insurers, policyholders, and policymakers can take actionable steps to address the legal system’s impact on the cost of insurance. Triple-I remains committed to advancing the conversation and exploring actionable strategies with all stakeholders.  

To learn more, read this latest IRC report, our most recent brief on Legal System abuse, and follow our blog. 

Cyber Risk, Legal Environment, Technology

Crypto Theft Rulings
Use Simliar Logic
to COVID-Related
Business Interruption

Leave a comment

By Michael Menapace, Esq., Wiggin and Dana LLP

When I first wrote here about insurance coverage related to cryptocurrency theft, I discussed whether these digital assets were securities (as suggested by the SEC) or property (as suggested by the IRS) and how that might impact insurance coverage under a typical homeowners policy. 

I also discussed whether the full policy limits for generic property were available for the theft of the assets or a policy sublimit for money would apply. 

At that time, courts had provided little guidance on the issue, and few situations were analogous.  In recent years, however, guidance has emerged, including from a line of cases that would not appear to have much relevance at first glance. 

Wrestling over “physical” loss

Nearly every appellate court in the country has wrestled with the issue of whether economic losses experienced by businesses as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic were covered by their commercial property insurance policies.  A commercial property policy typically covers the “physical” loss of or damages to property.  Insurers uniformly denied those business interruption claims and thousands of businesses sued.  Courts consistently rejected the businesses’ claims for coverage because the COVID-19 virus does not change the structure of the insured property, and purely economic losses are not “physical” loss or damage. 

Similar to the commercial property insurance policies at issue in the COVID-19 claims, a typical homeowners policy covers the direct physical loss of covered personal property.

In 2021, Ali Sedaghatpour had approximately $170,000 of his cryptocurrency stolen and made a claim under his homeowners insurance policy.  The insurer paid him the $500 limit for the theft of electronic funds, but denied coverage for the remainder of the loss.  The homeowner sued and the federal district court for the East District of Virginia ruled in favor of the insurer.  Recently, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the decision in favor of the insurer.  The case was titled Sedaghatpour v. Lemonade Insurance Co. (Case No. 23-1237). 

The court ruled that the digital theft of the homeowners’ currency did not amount to direct “physical” loss and the insurer owed the homeowner nothing more than the $500 it had already paid.  The appellate court did not disturb other findings by the trial court – including the lower court’s citation to dictionary definitions of cryptocurrency, which state that cryptocurrency exists “wholly virtually”

Looking ahead

In the Sedaghatpour case, the courts were applying Virginia law; however, given the uniform development of “physical loss” throughout the country in the COVID-19 context, I expect other courts around the country will come to the same conclusion when the issue of how to treat digital assets comes before them.  I likewise observe that some insurers have revised their policy language to state expressly that the loss of “electronic currency” is not covered. 

These recent court cases confirm that individuals owning cryptocurrency should take extra care to protect their digital assets and should not rely on standard language in homeowners insurance policies to hedge against theft.

Michael Menapace is a Triple-I Non-Resident Scholar, Co-chair of the Insurance Practice Group at Wiggin and Dana LLP, a professor of Insurance Law at the Quinnipiac University School of Law, and a Fellow of the American College of Coverage Counsel.

Catastrophes, Disaster Resilience, Floods, Risk Management, Technology, Wildfire

Data Fuels the Assault
on Climate-Related Risk

Leave a comment

By Lewis Nibbelin, Contributing Writer, Triple-I

Identifying opportunities to mitigate climate risk was on the minds of “Risk Take” presenters at Triple-I’s 2024 Joint Industry Forum (JIF). Risk Takes – a new addition at JIF – are 10-minute problem/solution-oriented presentations by high-impact experts who are deeply engaged in addressing specific perils. 

Inserted between panel discussions of broader issues and trends, these compact talks were tightly focused on how current challenges are being met.

Munich Re US, for example, is diving deep into understanding how consumers and insurers perceive climate-related risks. According to RiskScan 2024, a recently published survey by Munich Re US and Triple-I, more than one-third of respondents ranked climate change as a top concern, identifying it as “a key driver of insurance costs,” said Kerri Hamm, EVP and head of cyber underwriting, client solutions, and business development at Munich Re US.

However, when it comes to flood risk, the survey highlighted a substantial disconnect between concern about the peril and understanding of related insurance coverage. Despite understanding the rising severity of climate risks and their direct influence on insurance costs, many consumers erroneously believe their homeowners policy includes flood coverage or that they do not reside in an area at risk of flooding, contributing to a significant flood protection gap.

High-risk areas are only expanding, Hamm pointed out, as upsurges in flash flooding implicate more and more noncoastal properties. Increased private-sector interest in flood risk has led to new forms of flood coverage, such as a private Inland Flood Endorsement offered at Munich Re, to support these properties. Take-up rates for these insurance products remain low – underscoring the importance of consumer education and improved training for agents and brokers to encourage flood insurance sales.

“We can do better as an industry to make options available, attractive, and better known to vulnerable homeowners,” Hamm said. Education is vital, as is “developing innovative solutions that benefit our society by closing the insurance gap.”

Combining geoscience with data science is one solution, said Helge Jørgensen, CEO and co-founder of the Norway-based 7Analytics. Jørgensen discussed how, by leveraging geological and hydrological information with machine learning technology, his company develops granular data that can map out property flood risk “neighbor by neighbor,” enabling highly representative flood policies.

Beyond incentivizing private insurers to write flood coverage, this data is further “crucial for communities,” Jørgensen stressed, “because, if you have a lot of information on which areas and buildings are more exposed to flooding, then you can build resilience.”

Urban growth, particularly rising populations in higher-risk areas, render community-level resilience initiatives even more important, he noted.

Guidewire’s Christina Hupy reinforced Jørgensen’s emphasis on utilizing granular data while discussing HazardHub, a property risk data platform owned by Guidewire.

“Historically, risk data was provided only at the Census block or even ZIP code level,” Hupy said, whereas HazardHub provides comprehensive and updated geospatial data across various perils to pinpoint individual property risk levels.

In collaboration with Triple-I, HazardHub will release a report in early 2025 focusing on wildfire risk within three high-risk California counties, aiming to demonstrate how using detailed geographic data can help sustain or improve underwriting profitability within such areas.

“We’re going to need to look at mitigation in these high-risk areas as the next frontier,” Hupy said, “to spark that interest from California government and carriers” and enhance resilience “both from a customer and a business perspective” in the state.

California’s Department of Insurance helped launch this frontier last month by announcing new regulations allowing insurers to use catastrophe risk modeling to set rates, rather than limiting insurers to only historic risk data, as was the rule for decades. Insurers must also expand their coverage in riskier areas and account for resilience efforts when setting rates, which was also not previously possible.

Alongside emerging forms of insurance coverage and innovative granular data tools, such regulations empower the insurance industry to incentivize climate risk mitigation and achieve considerable progress towards eliminating the protection gap.

Learn More:

RiskScan 2024 Reveals Risk Priorities Across the Insurance Marketplace

JIF 2024: What’s In a Name? When It Comes to Legal System Abuse, A Lot

JIF 2024: Collective, Data-Driven Approaches Needed to Address Climate-Related Perils

JIF 2024: What Resilience Success Looks Like

JIF 2024: Panel Highlights Human-Centered Use of Advanced Technology

Climate Resilience and Legal System Abuse Take Center Stage in Miami