By Jamie Lewis, Assistant Vice President
We often have accounts that are so similar in risk, size, and coverage that providing a larger combined policy seems ideal for all parties involved. We also know how difficult, and at some times, impossible it is to combine multiple insureds into one group policy. We recently had a Site Pollution Liability account that presented the perfect opportunity to do this.
Throughout two or three years we have gradually written a series of Site Pollution policies for various Senior Care/Nursing Home Facilities with one agency. Each had multiple scheduled locations and named insureds, varying from just a few to up to twenty. Some were on multi-year forms, different effective dates, carriers, and varying coverages. When the larger policy came up for renewal, we began working on a strategy to have these locations combined. The renewal application already captured the majority of the locations and we were able to use applications from the prior policies for the additional locations we would be adding. We carefully reviewed all policies to make sure that the single combined quote included the correct addresses, named insured information, and retroactive dates. Since we were moving insureds into one shared policy, they would also be sharing limits. The limits on the combined option were increased so that the shared limit per location remained the same as in previous years. In other words, we wanted to make sure that sharing a limit wouldn’t result in a decrease in overall limits/coverage for each location.
Once a finalized quote was prepared, our agent met with various chairs of each organization to present the offer. Not all parties wanted to participate. Some individuals chose not to purchase the coverage at all, while others did not want to share one common policy. However, a version of the quote combining most entities was agreed upon and purchased. This included a 3-year Site Pollution policy for over 40 different Senior Care/Nursing Home Facilities. Coverage also included Mold, Legionella, underground storage tank coverage for one location, disinfection cost coverage, loss of business income and crisis management expense coverage. An Additional Named Insured endorsement was also provided, naming over 40 different entities as Named Insureds to the policy. While this became a sizable policy, the premium per entity was well below the minimum premium that would have been charged for separate policies.
This process certainly required careful review of all information by the insurance company, Beacon Hill, the retail agent, and the insureds. But ultimately, we were able to provide a well-crafted policy meeting the needs of multiple insureds for a very competitive premium per entity. On-going servicing is also more efficient when just needing to modify a portion of one policy instead of working with multiple policies and underwriters. We were able to partner with an underwriter and agent who understood the risk, the contacts, and value in offering this coverage.