C
craufujy
Member
Hi there
I think I'm getting confused here...
Does peak 1 relate to all assets (that fit in with the admissibility rules) and all liabilities for all business (NP, WP, UL)? But valued on a statutory basis.
And peak 2 relates only to WP liabilities valued on a realistic basis? What confuses me is that all the admissible assets from peak 1 are taken into account here plus more,so it seems that assets of the whole business is being compared against liabilities of only WP business...
Some clarification would be appreciated!
Also, if under twin peaks, we hold the more onerous of peak 1 and peak 2 liabs, can this be a fair comparison if only WP is valued under peak 2?
Thanks.
I think I'm getting confused here...
Does peak 1 relate to all assets (that fit in with the admissibility rules) and all liabilities for all business (NP, WP, UL)? But valued on a statutory basis.
And peak 2 relates only to WP liabilities valued on a realistic basis? What confuses me is that all the admissible assets from peak 1 are taken into account here plus more,so it seems that assets of the whole business is being compared against liabilities of only WP business...
Some clarification would be appreciated!
Also, if under twin peaks, we hold the more onerous of peak 1 and peak 2 liabs, can this be a fair comparison if only WP is valued under peak 2?
Thanks.