---- next item ----
Content-Type: Text/Plain
Could someone please clarify the meaning of horizontal and vertical triggers?
I always thought a trigger was "Claims-Made" or "Occurrence." Or are there
different types of triggers - coverage triggers and ( _____ ?) triggers? I
understand Bouska's concepts, but some definitions would help me to understand
the written statements below. Does the attachment point always refer to one
type of trigger (either horizontal or vertical); or could Bouska be switching
between aggregate and per occurrence limits? Another take is that she is
looking from the perspective of the primary insurer in one instance and the
reinsurer in the other, as Siewert does in his article: he speaks of "limits"
as the deductible limit, referring to the excess layer, and later the "limits"
are the cap, so we are dealing with ground up losses in the primary layer. He
fails to specify his perspective. But, keep in mind these people weren't
English majors. Much better to understand the concept, not the written word.
jimshoenfelt@amdyne.net ("Jim Shoenfelt") on 09/10/98 05:26:24 PM
To: studygroup7@lists.casact.org ("Exam7") @ INTERNET
cc: (bcc: Gwendolyn L. Anderson)
Subject: US Pollution Liabilities
Can someone explain these seemingly contradictory statements from
Bouska/MicIntye.
p.98 "High attachment points above ground provide more protection against
pollution claims than asbestos"
P.92 "We could generally expect the impact of asbestos to increase relative to
that of pollution as teh attachment point abouve the ground increases."
---- next item ----
Content-Type:Text/Plain; Name="ATT01"
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">