J
jonathans
Member
Could someone please explain part 2?
Thanks!
-
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.
Could someone please explain part 2?
Thanks!
Hemant Rupani
Senior Member
Ouch! very fewer marks for this odd question.
Understanding given information:-
Let Y= aggregate loss cost, and \( x_i \)= loss from \(i^{th}\) case in the period of coverage
Note: a case could be an individual loss or a loss from individual event, not given in the question. That won't alter the answer anyway.
So, \(Y=\Sigma_i max(x_i-1000000,0)\)
Now, table is given for \(LEV_Y(Aggregate~Limit) \)
Note: here LEV is based on absolute numbers rather than relative to EML/PML.
there are 2 implicit assumptions in the given answer that I could think of.
1) \( x_i <= 2000000 \) for any i. Otherwise, that loss will be uncovered before any reinstatement occur. Or, maybe it is possible to allow for a loss in the layer before and after reinstatement in part.
2) there is no payable reinstatement allowed. Otherwise, calculations are not straightforward.
Answers:
a)
from unlimited free reinstatements - there is no aggregate limit
from AAD - first 1000000 will be reduced that would otherwise be counted as the final loss
So, LEV(Unlimited)-LEV(1000000) or E(Y)-LEV(1000000)=1289000-350000=939000
b)
from 1 free reinstatement - the aggregate limit is twice of the given loss layer.
So, LEV(2000000)=525000
c)
from AAD - first 1000000 will be reduced that would otherwise be counted as the final loss
would be counted as the loss is answered in 'b)'
So, LEV(2000000)-LEV(1000000)=525000-350000=175000
PS: I don't know how the first alternative to 'c)' is calculated. maybe, they took Deductible as aggregate excess besides case excess.
Understanding given information:-
Let Y= aggregate loss cost, and \( x_i \)= loss from \(i^{th}\) case in the period of coverage
Note: a case could be an individual loss or a loss from individual event, not given in the question. That won't alter the answer anyway.
So, \(Y=\Sigma_i max(x_i-1000000,0)\)
Now, table is given for \(LEV_Y(Aggregate~Limit) \)
Note: here LEV is based on absolute numbers rather than relative to EML/PML.
there are 2 implicit assumptions in the given answer that I could think of.
1) \( x_i <= 2000000 \) for any i. Otherwise, that loss will be uncovered before any reinstatement occur. Or, maybe it is possible to allow for a loss in the layer before and after reinstatement in part.
2) there is no payable reinstatement allowed. Otherwise, calculations are not straightforward.
Answers:
a)
from unlimited free reinstatements - there is no aggregate limit
from AAD - first 1000000 will be reduced that would otherwise be counted as the final loss
So, LEV(Unlimited)-LEV(1000000) or E(Y)-LEV(1000000)=1289000-350000=939000
b)
from 1 free reinstatement - the aggregate limit is twice of the given loss layer.
So, LEV(2000000)=525000
c)
from AAD - first 1000000 will be reduced that would otherwise be counted as the final loss
would be counted as the loss is answered in 'b)'
So, LEV(2000000)-LEV(1000000)=525000-350000=175000
PS: I don't know how the first alternative to 'c)' is calculated. maybe, they took Deductible as aggregate excess besides case excess.