Underwriting Judgement on a Solvent-Blending Risk beside a Timber Yard
A paint and thinner blending unit near Coimbatore seeks Rs 9.00 crore cover on building, plant and stock at the class rate of Rs 1.20 per mille. The risk has 4,000 sq m of built-up area; 18,000 litres of solvent-based raw material in 200-litre drums, of which 4,000 litres are kept in an open lean-to yard; the drum store has ordinary, non-flameproof light fittings and no fixed extinguishing system; 20 kg LPG cylinders for the canteen are stored beside the drum store; and the boundary wall is 12 m from an open timber yard with a saw mill. The nearest fire station is 11 km away and the municipal hydrant is dry for most of the year. There have been two electrical fires in three years (Rs 1.8 lakh and Rs 4.5 lakh), and the wiring has not been replaced. The insurer's underwriting guide sets a maximum net line of Rs 2.50 crore for this occupancy and requires referral of any risk within 30 m of a timber yard.
1. State your underwriting decision and the terms on which the risk could be written, justifying each condition by reference to the hazard it addresses.
Read the worked answer
Decision: do not write it on the class terms sought. It can only be referred as an excess-rated, warranty-loaded risk, and only to the extent the line and reinsurance allow.
- Solvent drums in an open lean-to and non-flameproof fittings in the drum store. This is the dominant exposure and the probable cause of the next loss. Make it a condition: all solvent in a separate masonry, ventilated store, closed drums, flameproof fittings, bunding and drainage to contain spills, fixed water or foam protection with a dedicated reserve.
- LPG cylinders beside the drum store. Remove to a cage at least 15 m from any storage, or delete the canteen cooking altogether.
- 12 m from an open timber yard and saw mill. The guide requires referral: either decline, or accept only with a substantially increased rate and a large deductible, and only if a fire wall is built and the neighbour also improves its boundary.
- 11 km to the fire station and a dry hydrant. Private water storage and a pump set become a condition of cover, not a recommendation; raise the deductible accordingly.
- Two electrical fires and unreplaced wiring. Obtain a certificate from a licensed electrical contractor for complete rewiring; make it a warranty with a 60 to 90 day improvement period.
- Line size. Rs 9.00 crore far exceeds the Rs 2.50 crore net line, so the balance must be co-insured or facultatively reinsured before quotation.
The rate must be well above Rs 1.20 per mille; that rate belongs to an ordinary, well-protected paint unit, not this one.
2. Explain how you would handle the accumulation exposure and the placement of a sum insured far above the net line.
Read the worked answer
Accumulation. The timber yard is a separate policy but not a separate fire. One event - burning solvent drums igniting the timber yard, or the reverse - could produce losses under both policies simultaneously, and also under any other property within a 30 m radius. Before writing, add the requested Rs 9.00 crore to the exposure already carried on the timber yard and on neighbouring risks, and check that the total fits the catastrophe or event retention. If it does not, buy proportionate facultative reinsurance or reduce the line. This is precisely why the guide refers risks within 30 m: the concern is the aggregate retained per event, not the quality of the individual risk.
Line and placement. With a net line of Rs 2.50 crore against a Rs 9.00 crore sum insured, the insurer can only act as a minority co-insurer or must secure facultative support on the balance. Never bind the full Rs 9.00 crore and hope to place it later: between inception and placement the entire sum insured sits on the insurer's own account.
Treaty check. Confirm whether the automatic treaty excludes hazardous occupancies or classes solvent storage as petroleum-type business outside the facility; if it does, the whole risk needs facultative placement rather than treaty protection, which changes the economics of writing it at all.
3. The insured accepts the policy with a warranty about flameproof fittings, does not comply, and nine months later a fire starts in the drum store. Advise on the insurer's position, taking the claims history into account.
Read the worked answer
Moral hazard first. Two electrical fires in three years, both small, and no rewiring afterwards is the strongest adverse signal on the file. Small, frequent, readily arranged losses often precede a large one, and an insured that ignores a specific defect identified at survey should not be rewarded with a warranty alone. That history should have driven either declinature or a large deductible with a mandatory improvement programme, not an ordinary acceptance.
On the breach. A warranty or condition about flameproof fittings operates from the date of breach, not merely at the date of loss; where the insured never complied, the insurer has a strong defence against a fire that started in the non-compliant store. Two checks decide the position:
- Is the term drafted as a warranty or condition precedent, or is it only a 'recommendation' in the survey report? Only the former gives a defence.
- Is there a causal nexus between the breach and the loss? Here there plainly is, which makes repudiation defensible. Had the breach been unrelated (say, a stock-record warranty and a fire caused by lightning), repudiation would be far harder to sustain.
Handling. Do not repudiate on the warranty alone: establish that the survey report and the improvement correspondence reached the insured and were acknowledged, and secure the surveyor's findings on the point of origin before the debris is cleared.