Claims handling costs and quality of experts Feedback for group discussion

Group One - insurers Q 1 Q2 Needed for reserves/costs/information Separate representation should remain Need to improve comms/collaboration process Change may be forced by external regulators Loss of control of claim Q2 Prime consideration individual and expertise Price secondary with firm strength third (except big cases) Relationship beneficial but claim specific Personal recommendation rather than Yellow Pages

Group One - insurers Q3 Q4 SLA/TOE Prelim assessment with reserve – update/realign Budgets rare – usually block fee reserve Managed process driven by reporting requirement Q4 Continuous/qualitative assessment Monitor accuracy of reserves v settlements Audits of TPAs in line with SLA Triggered by unexpected movements Recommendations Global SLA/TOE Revisit adjuster/surveyor issue at future conference

Group Two - insurers Appointment of experts Gathering facts Coverage issues Liability issues Resource issues Recovery issues Objectivity Selection of expert Panels Location Experience E & O Price

Group Two insurers Management of experts SLAs TOE Budget Reporting criteria Assessment of experts Criteria? Timeliness/quality/reporting/price/accuracy of reserving Open and closed file reviews

Group three - experts Q1 Q2 Protect own and clients interests:cause nature and extent Skills not in house Independent sources of information Resistance by owners to u/w surveyor adjusting the claim Q2 Panels not resisted but not too narrow Choose by personal knowledge or reference Past record best advertising Prompt payment in exchange for reduced rates Location U/W relationship with assured and types of expert dictates who chooses

Group Three - experts Q3 Q4 Managing expectations Good instructions vital – as is clarification if unclear Estimates reasonable for fee Q4 Few audited Positive feedback is repeat business Questionnaires well received by clients Difficult to evaluate – which clients have the skills?

Group four - experts Q1 How else are u/w going to service the claims properly? Experts who really are experts Avoid duplication of experts Q2 Good experience in the past and reputation Price – value for money and overall result than actual rates Knowledge of clients and market procedures Bad timing of appointment can impair expert performance and affect result

Group Four - experts Q3 Q4 Communication Deal direct. Talk direct Record instructions Give instructions to others in expert manner Comms, comms, comms Q4 u/w experts in judging quality of work provided to them Every case different – objective criteria unrealistic Frequent dialogue between u/w and experts critical and would be profitable for recap at end of case