Column: Roger's Soapbox

Know Your Limitations

By: | May 6, 2015 • 3 min read
Roger Crombie is a United Kingdom-based columnist for Risk & Insurance®. He can be reached at riskletters@lrp.com.

The insurance of directors and officers has been of the keenest interest to me since the mid-1990s. When I say “keenest interest,” don’t get me wrong: D&O is as dull as printing money can be. But I have followed the discipline since ACE arrived in Bermuda more than 20 years ago. They wrote it and I wrote about it.

Advertisement




I know Side A when I see it. I’ve saved time by assuming that Side B covers what Side A does not.

Yes, I’ve met people who insist there is a Side C, at weird insurance conventions in places you’ve never heard of, but I prefer to think of D&O like a single from the 1960s (a song stamped on heavy plastic and played on … never mind). Side A was the hit single; Side B the filler. There were double A-sides, but I stray further from the subject with every passing word.

I mention D&O because I have lately become a director of the company that manages the managers of the apartment block I live in. The protection D&O coverage offers is now literally of the keenest interest. I’ll tell you straight: writing about D&O is less stressful than having D&O written for you.

I know Side A when I see it. I’ve saved time by assuming that Side B covers what Side A does not.

As the finest director never to draw a salary, I have suddenly become aware of the true value of D&O insurance to the insured.

Potential claims loom on every horizon. A director oversaw something imperfectly done? He failed to oversee or foresee something imperfectly done? Something happened while he was on vacation in Mexico? The poor so-and-so is liable every time.

We have a leaseholder who sends incomprehensible writs against us that he has drafted himself, claiming money he hasn’t lost and distress he hasn’t suffered.

Another leaseholder wants it to be Florida in the corridor while the ice piles up outside. One especially nutty fellow is on his fifth Jaguar of the year. Curiously, he doesn’t drive.

As a director, I’m liable for all their woes, errors, crimes and misdemeanors.

A press release issued last month reported that directors are often unaware of the terms and conditions applicable to their coverage. They have little clue, it seems, about basic stuff, such as term and limits.

Poor fools, I thought. Then it struck me: I also have no clue what the terms and limits of my D&O policy might be.

Clint Eastwood, that great director (and, as ‘Dirty’ Harry Callahan, officer), once said: “A man’s got to know his limitations.” Coverage-wise, I don’t know mine. I know the premium has been paid and the policy is in force, but beyond that I can’t tell my Side A from my Hepatitis B.

How many insureds, I wonder, cruise along, thinking that our bottoms are covered, without ever bothering to read the small print, or even the large? We insureds aren’t too bright, apparently.

Advertisement




But here’s the thing, which you probably know if you work in insurance: We insureds don’t want to know the details. It’s not that we’re big-picture people. We’re more like Batman with his cowl on backwards.

For sake of argument, let’s say I’m protected by a three-year policy with a limit of $1 million for covered behavior. Knowing that, I would have to worry about what happens that might take place in four years’ time or cost more than a million bucks. The writs guy could have finished law school by then (and be putting on the writs).

To be honest — and I speak for insureds everywhere — not knowing is a much smoother experience for all of us.

Ignorance really is bliss.

Share this article:

D&O Pricing

Buyers’ Market for D&O

Most brokerages are seeing decreased pricing for D&O coverage, although pricing may increase for their smaller company clients.
By: | April 13, 2015 • 5 min read
D&O

Overall, pricing for directors and officers insurance programs are down, thanks to increased carrier competition for excess lines, according to brokerage firms. But rates are higher for some sectors such as health care and life science organizations.

Advertisement




According to the “Aon Financial Services Group D&O Pricing Index” for the fourth quarter of 2014, the average price for $1 million in limits for Aon clients increased 10.3 percent from the third quarter of 2014, due mainly to the change in the mix of business from one quarter to the next.

Comparing the current quarter with the prior year quarter, the average price fell 12.2 percent.

For those programs that renewed in both Q4 2014 and Q4 2013, pricing fell 7.4 percent.

“We are entering a buyers’ market, as pricing is starting to come down in totality for these D&O programs,” said Brian Wanat, chief executive officer of Aon’s financial services group in New York City.

“We are entering a buyers’ market, as pricing is starting to come down in totality for these D&O programs.” — Brian Wanat, chief executive officer, Aon’s financial services group

While pricing for primary D&O policies is relatively flat, increased competition within the excess market is lowering prices, resulting in a net reduction for overall programs, Wanat said. As carriers such as Allianz SE in Munich enter the excess market, it creates a better supply environment, lowering prices.

“D&O has been profitable with no real increase in claims frequency or severity,” he said. “In many instances, only the primary layer comes into play, given dismissal rates where defense costs are contained and paid by the primary layer of D&O only, with the excess unscathed.”

Moreover, reinsurance, which has even softer prices, has been “ample and a good proposition for insurance companies,” Wanat said.

For Arthur J. Gallagher & Co., smaller private clients in particular are paying firmer prices because most only purchase primary policies and not excess policies, said Phil Norton, president of the company’s professional liability division in Chicago.

They are also getting larger percentage increases because of their mix of covered claims, including entity claim allegations such as antitrust and deceptive trade practices, which are more expensive because they are the leading cause of the higher loss ratios.

Advertisement




On the other hand, many larger firms are getting an overall decrease when they add excess, particularly if they are in the right industry, such as manufacturing, Norton said.

“Most manufacturers don’t have any unique risks and they tend to flow with the economy,” he said. “They don’t even have to be making extraordinary profit to be considered a very good risk – they just need to be stable.”

“When things are high, they can fall farther and if there are big stock drops, companies can pretty much count on getting D&O claims.” —  Rob Yellen,
 executive vice president, FINEX North America, Willis

Overall, AJG’s private clients saw an 8 percent to 10 percent price increase in 2014, which has relaxed to 5 to 8 percent increases in 2015 to date, Norton said.

Brenda Shelly, Marsh’s U.S. D&O product leader in New York City, said that, while excess rates for Marsh’s public company D&O polices have been declining since their peak in the fourth quarter of 2012, primary ABC rates are firming.

However, since lower excess prices offset primary market increases, companies with good risk profiles were still able to achieve overall program decreases each year, she said.

“In the private and nonprofit spaces, we continue to see rate and retention pressure, which we expect to continue for the next few quarters due to very broad coverage and historical low rates at the same time they were experiencing serious claims for the past few years,” Shelly said.

Jeffrey R. Lattmann, executive managing director, executive liability at Beecher Carlson in New York City, said that the clients that have had flat pricing on primary have had consistently well-managed, good financials, while the clients that have seen increased premiums have had material changes in risk, adverse development in their financials and claims paid.

Smaller companies, which have employment practices liability built into their D&O policies, are facing headwinds if they operate in California, Lattmann said. “If they have any employees in California, they are experiencing higher pricing and higher retentions, as it’s the toughest state to underwrite with all of the employment litigation.”

According to Willis data, public companies have seen less upward pressure on rates, although rate increases are likely for health care companies, homeowner/condominium associations, educational institutions and nonprofit entities.

For financial institutions, Willis is seeing small decreases on primary coverage, with slightly greater savings on excess. For companies that have yet to see relief from credit crisis increases, particularly financial guarantee companies, rate decreases could be as large as 25 percent.

“In the end, I don’t think the financial crisis was as scary from a D&O insurer perspective as many expected,” said Rob Yellen,
 executive vice president, FINEX North America, Willis in New York City. “While we’re still seeing bankers get sued when their banks failed, the amount of claims were not nearly as bad as many thought they were going to be.”

Looking forward, Yellen said, the D&O market is “at a crossroads.”

“We’ve had a relatively stable slow-growth economy and now have a pretty high stock market at or near 52-week highs,” he said. “When things are high, they can fall farther and if there are big stock drops, companies can pretty much count on getting D&O claims.”

Advertisement




Those companies are also facing challenges as the Federal Reserve appears ready to raise rates at any time, and a strong dollar is making it harder for U.S. companies to make money outside the U.S., Yellen said.

Moreover, the SEC is now focused again on accounting fraud, which typically hits D&O harder than insider trading.

“So while clients may see a bit of price relief this year due to competition, D&O exposure seems to be getting worse,” he said.

Katie Kuehner-Hebert is a freelance writer based in California. She has more than two decades of journalism experience and expertise in financial writing. She can be reached at riskletters@lrp.com.
Share this article:

Sponsored Content by Helios

Mitigating Fraud, Waste, and Abuse of Opioid Medications

Proactive screening for fraud, waste and abuse situations is the best way to minimize their effects on opioid management.
By: | May 8, 2015 • 5 min read
SponsoredContent_Helios

There’s a fine line between instances of fraud, waste, and abuse. One of the key differences is intent and knowledge. Fraud is knowingly and willfully defrauding a health care benefit program for personal gain or profit. Each of the parties to a claim has opportunity and motive to commit fraud. For example, an injured worker might fill a prescription for pain medication only to sell it to a third party for profit. A prescriber might knowingly write prescriptions for certain pain medications in order to receive a “kickback” by the manufacturer.

Waste is overuse of services and misuse of resources resulting in unnecessary costs, whereas abuse is practices that are inconsistent with professional standards of care, leading to avoidable costs. In both situations, the wrongdoer may not realize the effects of their actions. Examples of waste include under-utilization of generics, either because of an injured worker’s request for brand name medication, or the prescriber writing for such. Examples of abusive behavior are an injured worker requesting refills too soon, and a prescriber billing for services that were not medically necessary.

Actions that Interfere with Opioid Management

Early intervention of potential fraud, waste, and abuse situations is the best way to mitigate its effects. By considering the total pharmacotherapy program of an injured worker, prescribing behaviors of physicians, and pharmacy dispensing patterns, opportunities to intervene, control, and correct behaviors that are counterproductive to treatment and increase costs become possible. Certain behaviors in each community are indicative of potential fraud, waste, and abuse situations. Through their identification, early intervention can begin.

Injured workers

  • Prescriber/Pharmacy Shopping – By going to different prescribers or pharmacies, an injured worker can acquire multiple prescriptions for opioids. They may be able to obtain “legitimate” prescriptions, as well as find those physicians who aren’t so diligent in their prescribing practices.
  • Utilizing Pill Mills – Pain clinics or pill mills are typically cash-only facilities that bypass physical exams, medical records, and x-rays and prescribe pain medications to anyone—no questions asked.
  • Beating the Urine Test – Injured workers can beat the urine drug test by using any of the multiple commercial products available in an attempt to mask results, or declaring religious/moral grounds as a refusal for taking the test. They may also take certain products known to deliver a false positive in order to show compliance. For example, using the over-the-counter Vicks® inhaler will show positive for amphetamines in an in-office test.
  • Renting Pills – When prescribers demand an injured worker submit to pill counts (random or not), he or she must bring in their prescription bottles. Rent-a-pill operations allow an injured worker to pay a fee to rent the pills needed for this upcoming office visit.
  • Forging or Altering Prescriptions –Today’s technology makes it easy to create and edit prescription pads. The phone number of the prescriber can be easily replaced with that of a friend for verification purposes. Injured workers can also take sheets from a prescription pad while at the physician’s office.

Physicians

  • Over-Prescribing of Controlled Substances – By prescribing high amounts and dosages of opioids, a physician quickly becomes a go-to physician for injured workers seeking opioids.
  • Physician dispensing and compounded medication – By dispensing opioids from their office, a physician may benefit from the revenue generated by these medications, and may be prone to prescribe more of these medications for that reason. Additionally, a physician who prescribes compounded medications before a commercially available product is tried may have a financial relationship with a compounding pharmacy.
  • Historical Non-Compliance – Physicians who have exhibited potentially high-risk behavior in the past (e.g., sanctions, outlier prescribing patterns compared to their peers, reluctance or refusal to engage in peer-to-peer outreach) are likely to continue aberrant behavior.
  • Unnecessary Brand Utilization – Writing prescriptions for brand medication when a generic is available may be an indicator of potential fraud, waste, or abuse.
  • Unnecessary Diagnostic Procedures or Surgeries – A physician may require or recommend tests or procedures that are not typical or necessary for the treatment of the injury, which can be wasteful.
  • Billing for Services Not Provided – Since the injured worker is not financially responsible for his or her treatment, a physician may mistakenly, or knowingly, bill a payer for services not provided.

Pharmacies

  • Compounded Medications – Compounded medications are often very costly, more so than other treatments. A pharmacy that dispenses compounded medications may have a financial arrangement with a prescriber.
  • Historical Non-Compliance – Like physicians, pharmacies with a history of non-compliance raise a red flag. In states with Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs (PDMPs), pharmacies who fail to consult this database prior to dispensing may be turning a blind eye to injured workers filling multiple prescriptions from multiple physicians.
  • Excessive Dispensing of Controlled Substances – Dispensing of a high number of controlled substances could be a sign of aberrant behavior, either on behalf of the pharmacy itself or that injured workers have found this pharmacy to be lenient in its processes.

SponsoredContent_Helios

Clinical Tools for Opioid Management

Once identified, acting on the potential situations of fraud, waste, and abuse should leverage all key stakeholders. Intervention approaches include notifying claims professionals, sending letters to prescribing physicians, performing urine drug testing, reviewing full medical records with peer-to-peer outreach, and referring to payer special investigative unit (SIU) resources. A program that integrates clinical strategies to identify aberrant behavior, alert stakeholders of potential issues, act through intervention, and monitor progress with the injured worker, prescriber, and pharmacy communities can prevent and resolve fraud, waste, and abuse situations.

Proactive Opioid Management Mitigates Fraud, Waste, and Abuse

Opioids can be used safely when properly monitored and controlled. By taking proactive measures to reduce fraud, waste, and abuse of opioids, payers improve injured worker safety and obtain more control over medication expenses. A Pharmacy Benefit Manager (PBM) can offer payers an effective opioid utilization strategy to identify, alert, intervene upon, and monitor potential aberrant behavior, providing a path to brighter outcomes for all.

This article was produced by Helios and not the Risk & Insurance® editorial team.



Helios brings the focus of workers’ compensation and auto no-fault Pharmacy Benefit Management, Ancillary, and Settlement Solutions back to where it belongs—the injured person. This comes with a passion and intensity on delivering value beyond just the transactional savings for which we excel. To learn how our creative and innovative tools, expertise, and industry leadership can help your business shine, visit www.HeliosComp.com.
Share this article: