Citation

Forbes SW. J. Risk Insur. 1970; 37(4): 527-538.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1970, American Risk and Insurance Association, Publisher John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.2307/251062

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The strengths and deficiencies of automobile bodily injury liability loss reserving regulation are analyzed in relation to the 1944-1961 reserving performances of a sample of eighty automobile insurers. The study indicates that loss reserving regulation is in need of reform. A pragmatic regulatory approach is needed to replace the traditional reliance upon uniform Convention Annual Statement minimum loss reserve requirements which have often contributed to inadequate unpaid liability valuations. To be effective, loss reserving regulation should be conducted on a firm-by-firm basis, relying upon such flexible tools as financial audits, minimum surplus margins, and contingency reserve requirements.