Tillinghast has just released its 2007 update on U.S. Tort Cost Trends. The good news is that tort costs declined by 5.5 percent to $247 billion in 2006. That approximates $825 per person Ã¢â‚¬“ $57 less per person than in 2005. The $13.4 billion decrease in costs over 2005 marks the first downward trend since 1997. A significant drop in commercial tort costs, due in part to the waning impact of asbestos costs was a contributing factor. But the near-term outlook is not so rosy, according to Tillinghast. It warns that several factors, including the potential fallout from the current subprime loan crisis, are expected to reverse the figures in 2007. As it notes: when people lose money, litigation tends to follow. Looking ahead Tillinghast expects growth in U.S. tort costs of around 2.5 percent in 2007, with slightly higher growth of 4.5 percent in the following two years. As well as subprime mortgages, global warming and backdating of options are just some of the issues that it expects will impact future trends. Check out I.I.I.’s update on the liability system.Ã‚
Reinsurance broker Guy Carpenter has released aÃ‚ briefing on the threat of errors & omissions (E&O) litigation on U.S. real estate professionals. To more accurately gauge the likelihood of litigation Guy Carp has developed its own subprime E&O litigation index. The index measures a combination of factors influencing the E&O litigation climate including foreclosure rate, subprime mortgage delinquency rate, litigation attorneys per mortgage professional, truth in lending legislation and banking litigation ranking. According to the index, Illinois, Michigan and Massachusetts claim the highest overall E&O litigation risk levels, with Mississippi, Indiana and Ohio close behind. The study throws up an interesting fact: there is little to no correlation between the highest risk states for subprime-related E&O litigation and those states such as Arizona and Nevada with the greatest number of subprime mortgage delinquencies and/or foreclosures. Guy Carp also notes that the riskiest states are those with average rankings in most categories and an extremely high result in a single category.
In our September 21 posting we cited future predictions of an uptick in securities class actions as a result of the subprime market turmoil. Willis has just released another alert from the companyÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s financial institutions practice in which it confirms this trend. It notes that claims in the U.S. against directors and officers of financial institutions have started coming as a result of nearly 40 class actions and there will undoubtedly be more. At first these suits were predominantly restricted to U.S. subprime lenders and certain real estate investment trusts (REITs). However, Willis says it has become apparent that class actions are now touching financial institutions not directly related to subprime loan default exposures. Such cases allege that directors failed to disclose their companiesÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ exposures to losses in the subprime market and misled shareholders. A trend to monitor. Further commentary on securities class actions can be found at The D&O Diary, a blog focused on D&O liability issues.Ã‚
We’re in D.C. today at the Professional Liability Underwriting Society (PLUS) International Conference. Much to talk about for professional liability lines, especially given recent headlines on the subprime market turmoil. Reinsurance broker Guy Carpenter just released a briefing on this very topic titled: “Credit Market Aftershock Threatens Professional Lines Profits.” In its analysis Guy Carp notes that estimates of the insurance impact range from $1 billion to $3 billion, but when the dust settles total insured losses are likely to be at the top end of that scale. Most of the credit crunch’s impact will affect the D&O product line, although E&O suits, ERISA actions and other suits have been filed and could lead to substantial further insurance losses, according to the briefing. Guy Carp puts the potential D&O loss at in excess of $2 billion, but cautions that the full impact will not be known until 2008 or 2009. For our take on the subprime issue, check out a paper authored by Dr. Steven Weisbart, I.I.I. vice president and chief economist.
U.S. companies may afford themselves a sigh of relief, albeit brief, when they take in the headline findings of the fourth annual Litigation Trends Survey by Fulbright & Jaworski showing a distinct drop in the number of new lawsuits and regulatory actions filed against them. Based on interviews with in-house counsel at 250 major U.S. corporations, 17 percent of respondents said their companies had escaped the past year without having to defend a single new lawsuit, a sharp increase from just 11 percent in 2005-06. But despite the fact that internal investigations are down and fewer businesses are filing suit, Fulbright cautions that the litigation landscape remains fully loaded, with one-third of U.S. companies facing at least 25 lawsuits, and 18 percent defending 100+ cases domestically. As industries go, it appears insurers along with retailers faced the most litigation. Some 93 percent reported having to defend at least one new case this past year, and more than half from both sectors got stung with one or more $20 million dispute Ã¢â‚¬“ the highest of 10 industry segments represented. Insurers contended with the most $20 million-plus cases with 54 percent taking on more than 20 such actions. The upshot is that even with fewer companies reporting new lawsuits this past year, Fulbright notes that the vast majority of U.S. businesses remain significantly exposed to litigation. Check out further I.I.I.Ã‚ factsÃ‚ & statsÃ‚ onÃ‚ litigiousness.
Today the U.S. Supreme Court will begin hearing a major securities litigation case with potentially enormous implications for businesses. The outcome of Stoneridge Investment Partners LLC v. Scientific-Atlanta Inc. will decide whether shareholders can sue third parties (such as accountants and lawyers) charged with aiding a corporation that has defrauded its investors. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) already has the ability to sue third parties for aiding corporate fraud, but a decision in favor of investors in this case would likely expose U.S. companies as well asÃ‚ those doing business with them to significant additional costly shareholder suits. We donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t need to remind you of how much litigation costs U.S. businesses. For more on this, check out I.I.I.Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s liability issues update. Further commentary on the Stoneridge case can be found at The D&O Diary, a blog focused on D&O liability issues.
The overall trend of lower securities class action filings has continued through the first six months of 2007, but that trend may be reversing. ThatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s the upshot of a recent study from NERA Economic Consulting. The report notes that from 1998 through 2005 there were well over 200 federal class action filings each year, but filings dropped to 136 in 2006. While this general pattern has continued through June 30, 2007, NERA projects there will be 152 filings in 2007, a 12 percent increase on 2006. In the first half of 2007 there have been 76 filings, a 47 percent increase on the second half of 2006. A few other points of interest: the probability of a corporation facing at least one shareholder class action suit over a five-year period has declined to 6.4 percent; for the first time, all of the top 10 shareholder class action settlements exceeded $1 billion; eight of the top 10 settlements of all time were resolved in 2006/07, with EnronÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s $7.2 billion settlement top of the list; excluding the top 10 settlements, average settlement values doubled to $23.2 million in the 2002-2007 period. As for future trends, NERA notes that recent turmoil in the subprime market has led to seven claims in the first half of 2007. For our take on the subprime issue, check out a new paper authored by Dr. Steven Weisbart, I.I.I. vice president and chief economist. Further commentary on the NERA study can be found at The D&O Diary, a blog focused on D&O liability issues.
The next step following the landmark February 2006 Rhode Island lawsuit against three former lead paint manufacturers unfolded Friday with the release of a state proposal detailing cleanup and related costs. In short, the RI Lead Nuisance Abatement Plan would require the paint manufacturers to pay out $2.4 billion to clean up 240,000 housing units. It is, however, subject to court approval. Wherever this plan takes the lead paint issue in RI, itÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s worth remembering that recent court decisions in other states, including New Jersey, Missouri and Ohio, have rejected the public nuisance legal theory on which the RI lead paint suit was based. Time will tell how future lead paint litigation will develop, but clearly this issue has emerging consequences for a number of industries, including ours. Check out more I.I.I. info on products liability emerging exposures.
Reports that four of the largest microwave popcorn manufacturers in the U.S. are working to remove the butter flavoring chemical diacetyl from their products due to health risks to workers is good news for everybody it appears. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s been acknowledged for some time that a potentially significant exposure arises from factories packaging butter-flavored popcorn. Already a number of lawsuits have been pursued by workers at these factories due to alleged exposure to diacetyl. Further, various federal agencies have said they believe the butter-flavored chemical may result in bronchiolitis obliterans, also known as Ã¢â‚¬Å“popcorn packers lung.Ã¢â‚¬ Now Dr. Cecile Rose, a pulmonary specialist at DenverÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s National Jewish Medical and Research CenterÃ‚ has written to federal agencies, saying that doctorsÃ‚ believe they have identifiedÃ‚ the first case of a consumer who developed lung disease from the fumes of microwaving popcorn several times a day for years. The letter was first published by fellow blogger David Michaels, of the George Washington University School of Public Health on his public health policy blog (http://thepumphandle.wordpress.com). An emerging products liability exposure to keep our eye on.Ã‚
Every day another news headline appears on the subprime loan crisis in the U.S., so a release out of the London offices of Marsh on this topic makes for interesting reading. In it Marsh warns that the European financial services sector, including insurers, hedge funds, banks and ratings agencies, may be exposed to greater DirectorsÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ and OfficersÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ liability (D&O) and Errors and Omissions (E&O) liability claims in the wake of the subprime meltdown in the U.S. Citing aÃ‚ recent NERA Economic Consulting primer, Marsh says potential litigation arising out of D&O and E&O liability could include: lendersÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ lawsuits versus banks; shareholdersÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ lawsuits versus lenders, accountants, trustees and underwriters; insurersÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ lawsuits versus lenders; investorsÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ lawsuits versus trustees; trusteesÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ lawsuits versus lenders and underwriters on behalf of investors; as well as individual investor lawsuits. Marsh goes on to caution that European insurers, hedge funds, banks and ratings agencies must continue to assess the risks raised by the crisis and to examine their D&O and E&O exposures. What do youÃ‚ make of this analysis?