Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T16:10:01.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Contributions to the Theory of the Largest Claim Cover

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 August 2014

J. Kupper*
Affiliation:
Zurich
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In the wake of the technical development of our era we are increasingly faced with claims of extremely large amounts.

Whereas even in the past century large claims were mostly due to elemental or natural forces such as earthquakes, hurricanes and floods, there are today other causes, conditioned by human factors, that have considerably increased in importance. Another fact to be observed is that the risks that are passed on to the insurance market assume a more serious character year by year. Large building complexes, giant tankers, containers, atomic power stations, dams and jumbo jets pose for the insurers problems which are in no way easy to solve, since the risk covers required touch the limits of market capacity and their rating is subject to great uncertainties. At the same time, the readiness to underwrite such covers is a matter of utmost importance for the private insurance industry.

For the coverage of such large risks, various insurance forms have been developed in the past years within the range of non-proportional methods. Besides the excess of loss and stop loss covers in their usual form, the cumulative loss cover and the largest claim cover have attracted particular attention. The cumulative risk cover has, for example, been dealt with in [11]) and has also been frequently offered in practice. The coverage of the largest claim or, more generally, of the sum of the n largest claims does not appear to have gained a proper foothold in practice in spite of various valuable contributions in this field—considering particularly [2], [3], [5], [8] and [14]. The fact that it was during 1963/64 that various authors analysed these problems is no coincidence, for it was then that in two ASTIN Colloquia these topics were discussed.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Actuarial Association 1971

References

[1]Ammeter, H., Die Ermittlung der Risikogewinne im Versicherungswesen auf risikotheoretischer Grundlage. Mitteilungen Vereinigung Schweiz. Versicherungsmathematiker Vol. 57 (1957).Google Scholar
[2]Ammeter, H., Note Concerning the Distribution Function of the Total Loss Excluding the Largest Individual Claim. ASTIN Bulletin, Vol. III, Part II, 1964.Google Scholar
[3]Ammeter, H., The Rating of “Largest Claim” Reinsurance Covers. Quarterly Letter from the Algemeene Reinsurance Companies, Jubilee Number 2, 1964.Google Scholar
[4]Beard, R. E., Some Statistical Aspects of Non-Life Insurance. Journ. Inst. Act. Students' Society, Vol. XIII, part 3, 1954.Google Scholar
[5]Beard, R. E., Some Notes on the Statistical Theory of Extreme Values. ASTIN Bulletin, Vol. III, Part I, 1963.Google Scholar
[6]Benktander, G., A Note on the Most “Dangerous” and Skewest Class of Distributions. ASTIN Bulletin, Vol. II, Part III, 1963.Google Scholar
[7]Benktander, G., and Segerdahl, C.-O., On the Analytical Representation of Claim Distributions with Special Reference to Excess of Loss Reinsurance. Transact. of the XVIth Intern. Congr. of Act., Brussels 1960.Google Scholar
[8]Franckx, E., Sur la fonction de distribution du sinistre le plus élevé. ASTIN Bulletin, Vol. II, Part III, 1963.Google Scholar
[9]Hofmann, M., Über zusammengesetzte Poisson-Prozesse und ihre Anwendungen in der Unfallversicherung. Mitteilungen Vereinigung Schweiz. Versicherungsmathematiker, Vol. 55 (1955).Google Scholar
[10]Kupper, J., Wahrscheinlichkeitstheoretische Modelle in der Schadenversicherung Teil II. Blätter der Deutschen Ges. für Versicherungsmathematik, Vol. VI, Part 1, 1962.Google Scholar
[11]Kupper, J., Some Aspects of Cumulative Risk. ASTIN Bulletin, Vol. III, Part I, 1963.Google Scholar
[12]Pearson, K., Tables of the Incomplete Gamma-Function. Cambridge Univ. Press 1946.Google Scholar
[13]Segerdahl, C.-O., If a Risk Business Goes Bankrupt, when does ıt occur? A Basis for Fixing Net Retention. Transact. XVth Intern. Congress of Act., New York 1957.Google Scholar
[14]Thépaut, A., Le traité d'excédent du coût moyen relatif (Ecomor). Bull. Trimestriel de l'Inst. des Act. Français, No. 192, 1950.Google Scholar