Client stories

Named files, delayed rate talks, shorter packs

These notes are from people who sat with an extract and then sat with us. They mention the engagement they bought. One of them still thinks we asked information security for one table too many.

They spent the first week arguing with our extract, which was irritating and also the point. The briefing then showed our hire-car costs moving two months after the collision dates, not in the month the committee had been watching. I still think they asked for one table too many from IT.

Helen Cartwright, Head of Motor Claims, provincial mutual — Claims Trend Review

The list of clusters was short enough to work. We dropped two postcode flags that had been wasting referrals and kept the garage-and-hire pairing they highlighted on a Thursday-night pattern.

David Rahman, SIU manager, London TPA — Fraud Monitoring Briefing

They walked through twenty files with us rather than waving at a triangle. The late deterioration sat in contractor invoices after the initial make-safe, not in the indemnity decision. That changed who we invited to the next reserve meeting.

Fiona MacKenzie, Claims finance, household book — Reserve Leakage Study

The pack is eight pages. Our previous pack was forty-two. The underwriters now arrive having actually read the reopen note.

Owen Blake, MGA claims lead — Claims Committee Pack

Two longer rooms

Motor accident year after a network change

The insurer had moved a share of repair work to a new network in March 2024. Committee slides had shown a milder average severity and a quieter fourth quarter. System Routeline asked for repairer codes, authorised-repair dates, and total loss indicators, then split the year at the network switch rather than at calendar quarter. The milder average was a mix of faster total-loss decisions and a bulge of light-damage jobs still sitting with the old network. The new network’s heavier jobs had not yet closed. The briefing named the files still open and the week they would likely hit the ledger. The committee delayed a rate conversation that would have been based on half-closed work.

Amelia Grant, Chief claims officer, composite insurer

Storm cohort, roofing extras, and the second week

The mutual’s household book took a named-storm surge in January. Early paid loss looked in line with a previous event; the worry was the second-week invoices. System Routeline grouped claims by first notification date and by the trade on the largest invoice. The extras clustered in three contractor groups and in properties already on a previous escape-of-water claim, not in the coastal postcodes the board had assumed. The mutual changed who authorised works after day ten. They did not change the catastrophe load. That distinction mattered at the next pricing meeting.

Priya’s counterpart at a Scottish mutual, Reserving actuary