LLoyds names (backers/ underwriters)

[tw15]

Bet there is quite a few big LlLyds names getting a bit worried as they are more than likely to get a call to for the guarantees they have offered . In the past a lot of big wealthy estates backed Lloyds good to get the yearly fees not so when they have to stump up .

 

[David.]

Take the rough with the smooth?
Which particular liability are you thinking?

 

[tw15]

Just general thinking that a lot of insurance claims will be heading in to the big underwriters . Business interruption insurance claims if are covered will be massive for instance .

 

[nick...]

Seen on bbc news this morning that people who have insured for a loss of income won’t be covered by insurance companies for what ever reason.another case of little people unable to fight the big people.pretty unacceptable.
Nick...

 

[Goweresque]

Lloyds names no longer have unlimited liability. Its all done via Limited companies and LLPs now. Your losses are limited to the amount of capital invested. Thats not to say there may be losses due to insurance claims as a result of the current crisis, which members would have to either fund or reduce their insurance capacity, but if the losses were so huge that they didn't want to invest that much extra cash in order to keep trading they could just walk away.

 

[RhysT]

Asked our insurance rep if our business interruption insurance would cover a loss of income was told that it wouldn’t cover it. Don’t know why we pay £800 a year for it!

 

[Pateleygrower]

Asked our insurance rep if our business interruption insurance would cover a loss of income was told that it wouldn’t cover it. Don’t know why we pay £800 a year for it!

Because if your business was interrupted by an insurable peril you would get paid - fire in a standing crop of wheat, theft of sheep etc. That is why.

 

[Gong Farmer]

Lloyds names no longer have unlimited liability. Its all done via Limited companies and LLPs now. Your losses are limited to the amount of capital invested. Thats not to say there may be losses due to insurance claims as a result of the current crisis, which members would have to either fund or reduce their insurance capacity, but if the losses were so huge that they didn't want to invest that much extra cash in order to keep trading they could just walk away.

Wasn't the last big claim against 'names' in the mid-80s sometime? I remember an old boy coming to see us to apologise he wouldn't be a member anymore as he had lost everything through being a Lloyds name (that and he had also planted wall to wall Moulin the previous autumn).
I thought the fallout was so bad back then that the system was changed, as Goweresque says.

 

[RhysT]

Because if your business was interrupted by an insurable peril you would get paid - fire in a standing crop of wheat, theft of sheep etc. That is why.

That’s why we added it to our policy. Had a problem in 2016 when our tractor caught fire in the middle of the night, setting about 40 bales of wrapped hay alight. Insurance tried to dodge out paying as originally we said we were to sell the bales.

 

[goodevans]

Wasn't the last big claim against 'names' in the mid-80s sometime? I remember an old boy coming to see us to apologise he wouldn't be a member anymore as he had lost everything through being a Lloyds name (that and he had also planted wall to wall Moulin the previous autumn).
I thought the fallout was so bad back then that the system was changed, as Goweresque says.

I think at that time in history many people who fell on bad times used it as an excuse

 

[Lincsman]

I think at that time in history many people who fell on bad times used it as an excuse

I think it was linked to the Piper alpha disaster and asbestos claims.

 

[teslacoils]

No new "names" with unlimited liability allowed since asbestos I think.

Insurers will be sad I'm sure once the States gets its "must be someone's fault" hat on.

 

[Goweresque]

Wasn't the last big claim against 'names' in the mid-80s sometime? I remember an old boy coming to see us to apologise he wouldn't be a member anymore as he had lost everything through being a Lloyds name (that and he had also planted wall to wall Moulin the previous autumn).
I thought the fallout was so bad back then that the system was changed, as Goweresque says.

Yes asbestos claims was the problem, mainly coming in from the USA. All the product liability insurance had been written in times when everyone thought asbestos was the bees knees, so never assigned much risk to such business. Roll forward 30 years and the discovery that mesothelioma was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibres and the multibillion pound claims started rolling in. Nearly broke Lloyds itself, definitely broke lots of names. They eventually managed to put all the asbestos related stuff into a ring fenced part of Lloyds and from then on all private names had to be limited liability only.

 

[yellow belly]

When I had a tractor stolen I could claim on that part for business interruption for loss of use hire of replacement

 

[Cowabunga]

Yes asbestos claims was the problem, mainly coming in from the USA. All the product liability insurance had been written in times when everyone thought asbestos was the bees knees, so never assigned much risk to such business. Roll forward 30 years and the discovery that mesothelioma was caused by inhalation of asbestos fibres and the multibillion pound claims started rolling in. Nearly broke Lloyds itself, definitely broke lots of names. They eventually managed to put all the asbestos related stuff into a ring fenced part of Lloyds and from then on all private names had to be limited liability only.

Have a look at this for the way asbestos was handled up until the last quarter of the 20thC

 

[Happy]

Wasn't the last big claim against 'names' in the mid-80s sometime? I remember an old boy coming to see us to apologise he wouldn't be a member anymore as he had lost everything through being a Lloyds name (that and he had also planted wall to wall Moulin the previous autumn).
I thought the fallout was so bad back then that the system was changed, as Goweresque says.

Yes.
Got some old letters here from that time from former owner of next door estate asking my predecessors that as they were getting elderly would they consider selling their lovely farm to him as it would allow them to take life a bit easier and provide him with the economies of scale required. They of course could have lifetime occupancy of their farmhouse and a small field next to it.

A couple of years later there is a letter from him stating that as he was a Lloyds name, would they consider buying his land so that he could retain ownership of the mansion house and hopefully be able to be in a position to buy the land back in future once Lloyd’s situation was resolved.

 

[Farmer Roy]

Wasn't the last big claim against 'names' in the mid-80s sometime? I remember an old boy coming to see us to apologise he wouldn't be a member anymore as he had lost everything through being a Lloyds name (that and he had also planted wall to wall Moulin the previous autumn).
I thought the fallout was so bad back then that the system was changed, as Goweresque says.

there was an old bloke here who was a Lloyd’s “name” ( old family, been here something like 7 generations, since the very first white settlement here anyway ) who suffered a big hit, it would have been in the 80’s. Near bûggered them . . .
It’s taken the next generation a lot of work to recover I think