IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bracjl/v8y2002i04p705-728_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Review of Policyholders' Reasonable Expectations

Author

Listed:
  • Shelley, M.
  • Arnold, M.
  • Needleman, P. D.

Abstract

In the light of recent judgments by the courts, there are areas where the interpretation of Policyholders' Reasonable Expectations (PRE) by actuaries may need to be reassessed. Furthermore, the discussion paper on the exercise of discretion expected from the Financial Services Authority (FSA), as part of its review of with-profits business, is likely to raise wider issues. The time is therefore right for actuaries to have the opportunity to debate how PRE should be interpreted in the future. This paper is presented as a catalyst to enable that debate to happen, and the authors have set out their own views on some of the key issues. The paper discusses certain areas where the interpretation of PRE adopted by Appointed Actuaries in the past may no longer be consistent with recent court judgments. Following that discussion, the actuarial profession should attempt to establish a revised interpretation of PRE, in order to provide greater assistance to Appointed Actuaries currently advising on with-profits business.

Suggested Citation

  • Shelley, M. & Arnold, M. & Needleman, P. D., 2002. "A Review of Policyholders' Reasonable Expectations," British Actuarial Journal, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(4), pages 705-728, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:bracjl:v:8:y:2002:i:04:p:705-728_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1357321700003883/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bracjl:v:8:y:2002:i:04:p:705-728_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/baj .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.