Yesterday CanCERN and Insurance Council New Zealand facilitated a session for a small group of community leaders to look in more detail at the Canterbury Insurance Rebuild Programme progress.
It was an interesting session and a good opportunity to ask some pertinent questions about the figures that have been collated by CERA. CERA releases the collated information quarterly. CERA is seen as an independent body which can report progress with some consistency.
One of the big outstanding questions is just how many claims are missing from the figures. This report indicates 2600 but EQC Chief Executive Ian Simpson believes there are only 250. Surely we could expect that by the next quarterly report CERA has identified exactly how many there are, who they will belong to and why in fact they have been unaccounted for. Here’s hoping they are not our vulnerable people.
You can see by the presentation why some residents feel that insurers are on another planet. In terms of starting timeframes, we might as well be. Obviously the damaged or broken house began for people in September 2010 or February 2011. However, the insurer rebuild programme did not in fact start until halfway through 2012 so that is when they start tracking rebuild progress.
I don’t believe we will ever reconcile the two perspectives of just how long the repair and rebuilds have taken – the contexts are too different. I’m not even sure that particularly matters. What matters is how much longer it is going to take and the confidence and certainty people can get there is a plan in place to get them reinstated as quickly as possible.
The slide about media misinformation is an interesting one as the role of the media is a common topic amongst many of the forums I attend. Media don’t need to paint a ‘rose tinted’ picture of the rebuild but they do need to be accountable for reporting factual information. Misinformation causes people to have additional stress and sleepless nights and there is not a single person in Canterbury that needs that.
Thanks to ICNZ for presenting and responding to the questions and comments of community leaders.
The notes below relate to each of the ICNZ presentation slides. The pdf presentation can be viewed here.
Amounts paid slide
• End of Feb closer to 80% of commercial settled
Claims numbers slide
• 21, 962 relates to dwelling claims
• 2,680 undetermined whether under or over cap – waiting to be assigned to EQC or insurer
• Previous quarterly report showed 300.
• Insurers need to get on top of where those 2600 are and will they come to insurers
Total claims slide
• Claims settled means cash settled, rebuilt or purchased new home or repaired
• Pending or underway means the resolution has been agreed to but not yet reinstated or settled
• 3084 (14%) not ﬁnalised – either no decision made or no settlement yet oﬀered or disputed
Recovery timeline slide
• Starting point for insurers second half of 2012 for the start of rebuild programme. The ﬁgures collated now show those jobs started during this period
Overcap dwelling claims slide
• 3084 – think many are waiting for land claim information, others are disputing and others have various reasons for not being able to accept a settlement yet
• How can insurers help get those people to be in a position to settle?
In resolution slide
• Consent tracking helps to drill into granular level of understanding what is coming through the pipeline
Completing ‘in resolution’ slide
• Timelines are subject to all sorts of variables – not all in insurer control
• Builders reported they built 6000 homes last year and insurer only account for 1500 of those
• This year builders think they can build 7000 homes, a large portion of which will be insurers
• What about the 2600 insurers didn’t know about?
• What about the 3000 undecided who are not yet scheduled into the projected timelines?
• There is the potential that rebuild programmes could get pushed out by a year based on unscheduled ﬁgures
• If the build resource is still available …
ICNZ Facilitation role slide
• Insurers and ICNZ are frustrated about roadblocks too
• Weekly meetings with CEOs to see what needs to be done, what is inhibiting progress
• GMs meetings – monthly or as required
• Steering groups are to try to understand the complexity so insurers can plan and address issues – collaborative information sharing
• High level communications steering group established to insure all agencies get a heads up about upcoming information releases so that all agencies can be prepared to respond to customers with good information
Q – What constitutes contaminated land?
A – HAIL register – Environment Canterbury holds it and it records activity that means soil testing has to occur
Q – Where can we get individual insurer rebuild ﬁgures?
A – Most insurers report on their own website. The CERA released figures are based on aggregated data collated by insurer so they don’t tell the individual story. The aggregated ﬁgures don’t really demonstrate what the individuals are doing because of the diﬀerent market share and the diﬀerent ways insurers settle (predominantly cash settling or not). For example, IAG and SR have about 31-32% of residential rebuild market, VERO has 18%, Lumley and Tower have 8% and MAS have 2-3%.
Q – Why can’t insurers just take the 2600 claims and deal with EQC later?
A – EQC has to hand it over to insurers ﬁrst.
Q – Will insurers do a joint review if they disagree with EQC?
A – EQC has to agree to a joint review.
Q – How did CERA get the ﬁgure of 2638 undecided?
A – It is the gap between insurer reported numbers and EQC reported numbers.