Insurance Business forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Insurance Business | 18 Sep 2013, 12:00 AM Agree 0
The $17m crime was a “wake-up call” for the company to get back to its foundations and is severely reducing the number of brokers it targets.
  • Mr Curious | 18 Sep 2013, 09:32 AM Agree 0
    I was just thinking that the claims quantum would have been inflated on the claims that had the fraudulent fees allocated to them. DUAL would presumably have factored that into renewal terms offered. Are the clients affected likely to get a reduced premium or a discount on their future premiums or is the $17m a windfall for DUAL?
  • DUAL | 18 Sep 2013, 10:29 AM Agree 0
    Hi Mr Curious, thanks for the question. Please find below an exerpt from a recent statement from Damien Coates, CEO DUAL Asia Pacific:

    “The rate increases were required independently of the fraud. Given DUAL has written $500 million over the past 9 years, $17 million does not have a material impact on the loss ratio.

    “Unfortunately rate increases were required regardless of the fraud, even in removing the fraud claims it does not materially alter the overall loss ratio on the portfolio.”

    I hope this answers your question.
  • Mr Curious | 18 Sep 2013, 10:50 AM Agree 0
    I didn't realise the fraud took place over 9 years. I thought it was 3 or 4 years. Even still I was thinking about individual clients not the Dual portfolio. Whilst those premium numbers may be correct what is the number of claimants per policies written 1:20 or more. So the level of the fraud in percentage terms is concentrated on fewer client numbers thus having a much bigger impact (in percentage terms).
  • Male Broker | 24 Sep 2013, 11:16 AM Agree 0
    The silence is deafening!
Post a reply