|
Chennai:
The
recent settlement of an Enron-related lawsuit against
11 surety insurers reopens an old wound for the insurance
industry and illustrates the tendency of some companies
to take on coverage they are ill-prepared for, states
a Standard & Poors (S&P) Ratings Services
report.
This
is an example of underwriters not fully understanding
the consequences of what they are doing, comments
Bob Partridge, a managing director in S&P insurance
ratings.
On
2 January 2003, JP Morgan Chase & Company received
about 60 per cent of a total $1 billion claim on Enron-related
surety contracts, negating to a large extent the argument
made by the defendant insurers that they had unwittingly
insured a loan.
The
involvement of multiline insurers in this type of financial-guarantee
transaction, which should be the sole province of monoline
specialist insurers, reflects an underwriting breakdown
at the companies involved.
It
also highlights the industrys tendency to take on
such business (also known as credit enhancement) under
the guise of traditional surety coverage (which typically
involves much less risk).
But
the two are entirely different businesses with entirely
different capital and liquidity requirements, says
Mark Puccia, a managing director in S&P insurance
ratings. According to S&P there should be clear-cut
distinctions both in the types of risk involved and in
the type of rating applicable.
On
the one hand, an insurers ability to pay claims
on traditional business is addressed in S&P financial
strength rating (FSR). On the other hand, the willingness,
not just the ability, of a monoline specialist insurer
or of a reinsurer to pay claims promptly in the very specialised
arena of credit enhancement, irrespective of any suspected
fraud in the underlying transaction, is the focus of the
rating agencys financial enhancement rating (FER).
The
FER requires the applicable companies to meet the specific
needs of investors and lenders with a pay-first, ask-questions-later
approach.
This
distinction is at least as important in the reinsurance
market, where the prospects for reimbursement of the 11
insurers involved is uncertain and where monoline specialist
MBIA Insurance Corporation, committed to payment on a
transaction related to student loans, filed suit in July
2002 against its reinsurer on the business, a subsidiary
of Royal & Sun Alliance Insurance Group.
|