• 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.

ST8 2010 Specimen Paper - Q7 and inflation

T

test72738

Member
Could someone explain why the inflation factor for the year 2007 is 1.09^3? I would assume that it should be 1.07^0.5 (which gets you to the start of 2018) and then 1.09^2.5 which gets you to the midpoint of 2010. What's going on here?

Could someone also explain why the assumption that the claims inflation in 2010 is the same as in 2009? I don't see how we use that assumption in the calcs.
 
Could someone explain why the inflation factor for the year 2007 is 1.09^3? I would assume that it should be 1.07^0.5 (which gets you to the start of 2018) and then 1.09^2.5 which gets you to the midpoint of 2010. What's going on here?

Ah yes, I see your logic. It sounds like you’ve used a valid approach, given the information.

The examiners used a simpler method. Their interpretation is that any claim event occurring in 2007 (for example) will be exactly 7% bigger than a corresponding claim event occurring in 2006.

Notice that the question says 'estimate', so in practice a wide range of approaches was allowable as long as you stated your (suitable) assumptions.

Could someone also explain why the assumption that the claims inflation in 2010 is the same as in 2009? I don't see how we use that assumption in the calcs.

Let’s look at the 2006 accident year as an example. We inflate that up to the 2007 accident year using the factor 1.07. Then we inflate it up to the 2009 accident year by using an extra factor of 1.09^2. Now we have to inflate it up to the 2010 accident year, using the appropriate inflation rate for that year… but hang on, the question doesn’t tell us what inflation rate to use for 2010, so we’ll just use the same as before and state the assumption that “inflation in 2010 is the same as in 2009”. So the total inflation factor for the 2006 accident year is 1.07*(1.09^2)*1.09.
 
Ah yes, I see your logic. It sounds like you’ve used a valid approach, given the information.

The examiners used a simpler method. Their interpretation is that any claim event occurring in 2007 (for example) will be exactly 7% bigger than a corresponding claim event occurring in 2006.

Notice that the question says 'estimate', so in practice a wide range of approaches was allowable as long as you stated your (suitable) assumptions.



Let’s look at the 2006 accident year as an example. We inflate that up to the 2007 accident year using the factor 1.07. Then we inflate it up to the 2009 accident year by using an extra factor of 1.09^2. Now we have to inflate it up to the 2010 accident year, using the appropriate inflation rate for that year… but hang on, the question doesn’t tell us what inflation rate to use for 2010, so we’ll just use the same as before and state the assumption that “inflation in 2010 is the same as in 2009”. So the total inflation factor for the 2006 accident year is 1.07*(1.09^2)*1.09.

Thanks. The second point makes sense.

Going back to their method, I've never seen this before in any other exam questions - I always thought we inflate from the middle of the claim period to the middle of the exposure period in question. Could you suggest any other questions where they've used this method or am I OK to stick with line of thinking for the exam?
 
Back
Top