Hello,
I think both papers were. This is because P1 usually tests around the globality of specialists subjects - General Insurance, Pension, Life Insurance and Risk Management. P1 had 3 questions on Life Insurance with no other question related to Pension/Life/General Insurance/Risk Management. Question 5, where 15 marks are assessed on Corporate Governance was something really absurd to answer given the limited thinking you get and the notes in External Environment covering Corporate Governance.
Paper 2 was the cherry on the cake. Case Study 2 - First question, supposedly project management has been removed from the syllabus if I am not mistaken? Skills and experience of people - I kept thinking from which chapters this related to (as for each question, I think of the chapter involved for idea generation). Even for risks of mortgage loans for 15 marks, i.e. 30 bullet points, this isn't something I couldn't write much. When it comes to the last point, where you see you need to assess the suitability of three loans for 16 marks, you just get to the point of not writing anything given you know you would fail anyway. I seriously think that they had a case study but didn't know how to ask questions. Else, you wouldn't get big questions of 16, 15 marks where you have limited ideas. I wonder if the paper setters do really have a look at the Core reading when setting examination papers as claimed by the IFoA.
To conclude, both papers were really aweful.
