E
entact
Member
Hi
I've worked through the above question in detail with some assistence from the examiner's report but unfortunately the level of detail given in the examiner's report (in my opinion) is insufficient in the numeric parts to give me an indication of what is required to score high marks. I see how the figures have been calculated but It seems that a summary table was provided and the intermediate calculations were ommitted from the report.
To breakdown my query into smaller parts....
Part (i): the examiner's solutions give no assumptions - if this question came up again and I were to give the solution given in the examiner's report would I score full marks? Or would I need to give assumptions, show more intermediate calculations, give more explanation. I'm also not convinced by the reason to go with the chain ladder figure in 2004- the ULR is 113% by this method which is also out of line with experience to date.
Part (ii)
Even less explanation is given here - just a summary table. What additional information would need to be included here? The table shows 8 figures or the 'a priori' and 'BF ult', where 3 are only required - would any 3 suffice? Same comments as above re detail, assumptions etc.
Part (v)
The first part is given in the table in part (ii) solutions - again, my comments re detail apply.
The solution to part (b) is very difficult to follow - the calculation of the reserve deterioration. I'm not sure where they get the €90m or e justification or some of the assumptions.
Any help would be much appreciated.
I've worked through the above question in detail with some assistence from the examiner's report but unfortunately the level of detail given in the examiner's report (in my opinion) is insufficient in the numeric parts to give me an indication of what is required to score high marks. I see how the figures have been calculated but It seems that a summary table was provided and the intermediate calculations were ommitted from the report.
To breakdown my query into smaller parts....
Part (i): the examiner's solutions give no assumptions - if this question came up again and I were to give the solution given in the examiner's report would I score full marks? Or would I need to give assumptions, show more intermediate calculations, give more explanation. I'm also not convinced by the reason to go with the chain ladder figure in 2004- the ULR is 113% by this method which is also out of line with experience to date.
Part (ii)
Even less explanation is given here - just a summary table. What additional information would need to be included here? The table shows 8 figures or the 'a priori' and 'BF ult', where 3 are only required - would any 3 suffice? Same comments as above re detail, assumptions etc.
Part (v)
The first part is given in the table in part (ii) solutions - again, my comments re detail apply.
The solution to part (b) is very difficult to follow - the calculation of the reserve deterioration. I'm not sure where they get the €90m or e justification or some of the assumptions.
Any help would be much appreciated.