Slightly over two years after effectively beginning to implement mandatory motor insurance, the number of motor vehicles with Third-Party-Liability (TPL) coverage against bodily injury claims has risen to levels drastically above those reached before 2003. According to best available assessments, vehicles with some form of insurance now number 800,000 to 900,000, or a good cut above 80% of the country’s estimated 1.05 million cars and trucks in circulation.
As the number of insured motorists has more than doubled over the period, some of the worst fears of insurance industry leaders over inadequate premiums for the compulsory coverage seem to have mellowed.
One particular worry in the industry had been that the government-stipulated premium range of $40 to $60 for a year of TPL insurance against bodily injury, although in the lower bandwidth of actuarial calculations, was still being undercut by some insurers willing to sell this insurance for as little as $20.
Companies offering such dumping prices could easily be thrown into insolvency through a series of larger claims cases that they would find themselves unable to pay out and such bankruptcies would derail the insurance sector’s still feeble reputation, went the fears. Other frequently voiced concerns were over the need to have a pool covering accidents involving uninsured/unregistered cars and its negative financial impact on the insurance industry and the internationally proven tendency of claims awards going up after introduction of mandatory insurance, and the related costs to the providers.
Up to now most fears expressed by providers during the introduction of compulsory motor insurance have been unwarranted, said Walid Genadry, head of the Insurance Control Commission at the Ministry of Economy and Trade, which is in charge of monitoring the compliance of insurance companies with regulations and solvency requirements. “There are no serious concerns from supervisory perspective,” Genadry told Executive, acknowledging however that a handful of insurance companies achieved increases in premium production based on TPL sales that were disproportional to their market position.
The first two years of compulsory motor insurance were apparently on all counts less eventful than the industry had expected during the long political discussions and arduous efforts that had preceded the implementation of the law. Although a few companies, presumably by selling compulsory motor insurance at or below the minimum mandatory annual premiums, could boost their premium turnover from amounts in the $500,000 range to $2 million or more, many larger insurance firms did not greatly increase their portfolio of motor premiums.
Not interested in taking on risks insuring cars of advanced age and /or questionable road safety, these providers often push sales of the mandatory TPL cover only in conjunction with a profitable no-fault insurance package or at least a full TPL package combining bodily injury and material damage covers. Typically selling for between $120 and $150, these latter packages may still be inexpensive for the covers they provide but their comparative to the cheapest mandatory providers’ higher costs act as a barrier against customers who are only willing or able to purchase the cheapest insurance in the market.
“We don’t readily give TPL to unknown clients and will not underwrite TPL for bodily injury alone unless it is for a very big client,” said Fadi Chammas, general manager of Arabia Insurance. The bodily injury cover alone is cheap and very volatile, assessed Max Zaccar, general manager of Commercial Insurance. “We sell motor insurance, but not bodily injury alone,” he said.
Insurance leaders are far from convinced that concerns over the viability of compulsory motor insurance are moot. Costs of motor insurance have been driven up already by the fact that VAT costs had not been included when the premium ceilings for compulsory insurance had been determined, said Chammas, in whose opinion the financial results of selling compulsory motor insurance “are bad, forcing providers into losses.”
Court rulings over personal injury or death claims already have been tending towards awarding higher damage amounts when the judges knew that insurance companies rather than the individuals involved in an accident would have to pay, said Lucien Letayf Jr, general manager of Libano-Suisse Insurance. He also admonished that changes in the rules on settling claims now would force insurers to pay out claims in the first instance when the motorist had caused the accident in question while driving under the influence of alcohol or even intentionally, through a proven vehicular homicide. “We are not very happy with the existing law,” Letayf said.
What is undisputed by insurance companies and the regulator is that material damage coverage has to be included as soon as possible into the compulsory motor insurance, in order to achieve a farther reaching protection of society against the impacts of traffic accidents. One important question in this context is however for some insurance executives if it is not necessary to be more stringent in weeding out unethically acting and unprofessionally managed companies from the sector before implementing this second phase of compulsory insurance. Other managers ask that the ministry of economy would continue to stipulate a minimum amount at which TPL policies can be sold and enforce this minimum but abstain from imposing upwards ceilings and instead leave price determination on the upper end of the equation to providers and market forces.
Adding to the uncertainty over appropriateness of premiums is that currently there exist neither conclusive statistics on the sector’s cumulative premium volume from motor insurance in general or mandatory TPL, nor have insurance companies and the industry association ACAL hitherto compiled and published sector figures on claims paid out in motor insurance. A first survey on the loss ratios of TPL insurance is underway but as long as its results are outstanding, no clear picture on the real cost and effectiveness of the now existing mandatory insurance is possible.
However, compulsory motor insurance in any case has not contributed a great deal to the sector’s bottom line, suggested Zaccar. If 500,000 new contracts for compulsory bodily injury covers had been added at a value of $30 per policy to the industry’s total annual premium volume, this represents merely $15 million in additional turnover divided among some 45 insurance companies, he said, or less than 3 % of the sector’s balance sheet.
Still, the reality of compulsory motor insurance is a factor in the spreading of insurance awareness and in slowly increasing insuredness on national level. Standardized motor insurance products are suited especially for being sold over the counter of banks through the bancassurance distribution channel as well as through other non-conventional distribution channels, said Letayf.
A significant part of the insufficiencies associated with implementing motor insurance in Lebanon stems from overall weakness of concepts on the long-term financial losses caused by an accident. People widely do not approach the issue of an accidental death or traffic casualty under the aspect of the damage from the loss of the individual’s earning power. Thus on the sides of the insured and insurers, the cultural propensity is leaning towards lower assessments of accident damages and eventual underestimation of the impact of traffic accidents on the national economy.
This point was emphasized strongly in a 2004 study evaluating road safety in Lebanon and outlining the need for a master plan to improve road safety. Undertaken by SweRoad, a Swedish road safety consulting specialist, the study reinforced doubts on the number of traffic casualties in Lebanon and, based on reassessing these numbers upwards, attributed road accidents with having caused at the very least $500 million in damage to Lebanon’s GDP for the year 2003, and probably much more.
While unfailingly polite and careful to carry a positive tone throughout, the report passed a judgment on road safety in Lebanon that was as unsurprising as it was damning on literally every aspect of road safety and national planning of sustainable traffic. If no measures are taken to improve road safety, the report estimated that fatality numbers from traffic accidents would go up by 20 to 35% over the next five years, with the resultant increased damage to the national economy.
In light of such figures it seems nonsensical to assume that insurance coverage worth about $50 million to $60 million for TPL coverage of 800,000 to 1.05 million motor vehicles could decisively aid the country in managing the costs of road accidents. Nor, and very importantly, does it seem likely that current, unrefined premiums for mandatory TPL could create a substantial impulse towards having motorists adopt more defensive driving habits and make greater safety efforts.
Thus, further improving insurance requirements for motorists and achieving greater sophistication of motor-related insurance products will only have a robustly positive impact if such developments are achieved in concert with overall road safety gains. [box]
Motorists may currently still have access to TPL insurance at bargain prices. But considering the possibility that traffic accident numbers and fatalities in Lebanon, contrary to trends in developed nations, could increase further, the outlook on future costs of road accidents to society and individuals may be devastating – unless a radical change in road safety policies and attitudes can be accomplished.