• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

SA3 April 2012 Question 1.ii

S

Shradha

Member
Hello,


In Answer to April 2012 Question ii of 1 where we are asked :
Describe why an actuarial department might adjust claims data for large claims and catastrophes for the purposes of:
(ii) Reserving

A significant problem could be that the catastrophe claims if left in the data could bias the average occurrence date, E.g. a storm occurring at the end of an accident year may result in the year being less mature than normal as claims arising from storm damage tend to be reported quickly and therefore distort the reporting patterns

I'm not clear why would the accident year be less matured. I would expect it to be showing falsely more matured as cat claims are reported faster. Could someone please explain?

Thanks a lot!
 
Youre correct that on a reported basis the year would be more mature than normal due to the quick reporting of the storm claims, but on a paid basis it would be less mature than normal because the storm occurred at the end of the year and so a large proportion of the claims are unlikely to be paid (even though a lot of cat claims are generally settled quickly). In other words, the paid to incurred ratio would be distorted by the storm event.
 
Thank you very much for the explanation. This does make sense.
 
Back
Top