Lietz,Monika wrote:
> I think it has to do with the fact that one policy period spans 2
> calendar years (or 2 accident years). If new rates are effective
> 1/1/98 to 12/31/98, the last policy that can be written under those
> rates is a 12/31/98 to 12/30/99. Therefore you're looking at a period
> 1/1/98 through 12/30/99. The midpoint of that is 1/1/999
OK. Finally got it. I think.
It appears to come down to whether you are trending written or earned
premiums. The picture I had in my head was of written premiums, a square
not the parallelogram.
What's really bugging me is that I remembering learning about this in
another paper (on this syllabus, I think) and was quite happy with the 6
month average write date.
Especially now that carolyn.pasquino@zurich.com wrote:
"the "trend to" date is the average accident date (or average date of
exposure to loss) of the policy year"
Because losses are trended to the average accident date, not premiums.
It has to do with when the rates are in effect, not when the losses
occur.
-----Original Message-----
> From: Kathryn Herzog [SMTP:busdriver@pop.ne.mediaone.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 12:13 PM
> To: studygroup6@lists.casact.org
> Subject: Brockmeier Trend Period
>
> Is anyone out there confused by why Brockmeier trends premiums to
> one
> year beyond the effective date of the new rates and not to the
> midpoint
> of the period when the new rates are to be in effect?
>
> I am.
>
> -Kathryn
>
--------------54532358C51D96759A0834D3
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
Lietz,Monika wrote:
Ithink it has to do with the fact that one policy period spans 2 calendaryears (or 2 accident years). If new rates are effective 1/1/98 to12/31/98, the last policy that can be written under those rates is a 12/31/98to 12/30/99. Therefore you're looking at a period 1/1/98 through12/30/99. The midpoint of that is 1/1/999OK. Finally got it. I think.
What's really bugging me is that I remembering learning about this inanother paper (on this syllabus, I think) and was quite happy with the6 month average write date.
Especially now that carolyn.pasquino@zurich.com wrote:
"the "trend to" date is the average accident date (or averagedate of exposure to loss) of the policy year"
Because losses are trended to the average accident date, not premiums.
It has to do with when the rates are in effect, not when the lossesoccur.
-----Original Message-----
From: Kathryn Herzog [SMTP:busdriver@pop.ne.mediaone.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 04, 1999 12:13 PM
To: studygroup6@lists.casact.org
Subject: Brockmeier Trend PeriodIs anyone outthere confused by why Brockmeier trends premiums to one
year beyondthe effective date of the new rates and not to the midpoint
of the periodwhen the new rates are to be in effect?I am.
-Kathryn
--------------54532358C51D96759A0834D3--