Errors of judgement blamed in pounds 63m Lloyd's syndicate losses
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.MORE THAN pounds 63m of insurance losses that hit nearly 1,000 underwriting members at Lloyd's were the result of errors of judgement and lack of a full appreciation of the market by a professional underwriter, an internal Lloyd's report has concluded.
The report, obtained by the Independent, is the first to be fully prepared under Lloyd's policy, implemented last year, of trying to establish the background to large losses. It will attract further criticism about the market's working practices and standards.
Lloyd's mounted the inquiry in July last year after it became clear that the deficit at an insurance syndicate under the management of Rose Thomson Young, an agency company, far exceeded its financial resources.
The 'loss review committee' that examined the problems at Rose Thomson Young's syndicate was led by Timothy Boatman, a senior partner of Coopers & Lybrand, the accountants. He was joined by Michael Payne, a retired underwriter, and David King, a professional underwriter.
The committee has established that the actions of the professional underwriter Norman Bullen, who accepted risks on behalf of underwriting members on syndicate 255, were a result of 'errors of judgement and the lack of full appreciation of the market'. 'There is no suggestion of any degree of malpractice or thought of personal reward involved,' it said.
Mr Bullen, it said, 'has freely admitted to the committee and to members' agents (the groups that introduce members to syndicates) that, with the benefit of hindsight, he made an error of judgement which has had a severe effect on his names (the members), which include himself and agency personnel'.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments