- 7 - In addition to using the five methods, in arriving at each of its ultimate loss estimates for year ends 1993 and 1994, Tillinghast also factored in (to a greater degree for 1994 than for 1993) ultimate loss estimates that it had selected in the preceding year (prior selections).5 Because the prior selections were significantly higher than the estimates indicated by any of the five methods, the effect of factoring in the prior selections was to significantly increase Tillinghast’s ultimate loss estimates for each of the years 1993 and 1994. Tillinghast’s point estimates of petitioner’s unpaid losses for the years in issue were as follows: Tillinghast Unpaid Year Loss Estimate 1993 $74,027,009 1994 $77,029,796 Petitioner’s Add-Ons to Tillinghast’s Point Estimates David L. Maurer (Maurer), petitioner’s treasurer and vice president of finances, was responsible for selecting an estimate of unpaid losses to be recommended to petitioner’s board of directors and, following approval, reported on petitioner’s annual statement. For the years in issue, Maurer reviewed each 5 For example, in its analysis of petitioner’s unpaid losses for yearend 1993, Tillinghast first estimated losses by each of the five methods for each report year. Rather than simply blend these results to select ultimate losses for each report year, Tillinghast factored in the higher estimates of ultimate losses that had been selected in its yearend 1992 analysis.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011