Know your
cost of risk.

A cold-storage business asked whether it had enough insurance for the goods in its care. Our review found something more urgent: part of its work was excluded. We recommended removing the exclusion and put our reason in writing. The business used that advice to get the coverage corrected through its existing broker before hiring us.

That first question led to a broader review. Its property insurance had been assembled quickly after a carrier cancellation and had become a complex, expensive arrangement. Working with a property specialist, we developed a simpler replacement and recommended moving the property coverage before renewal. The client chose that approach, then appointed us on the remaining policies while keeping them in force for review at their own renewal dates.

When the business prepared to acquire another location, we priced the insurance before closing and arranged for the site to be added at close. At the later renewals, most policies stayed with their existing carriers; others moved where a change made sense.

The relationship now includes ongoing reviews of insurance requirements in customer and vendor contracts. When a customer later asked for a higher limit, we put priced alternatives in front of the business and arranged the change it chose. A question about one policy became a place to bring the next acquisition, contract requirement or insurance decision.

An engineering firm's payroll changed as contracts started and finished. Its workers' compensation hadn't kept pace. Payroll from completed work remained in the estimate, so the business was paying too much up front and waiting until audit to get money back.

We worked with the firm to correct the payroll figures and classifications, then obtained a reduction from its existing insurer. We then compared alternatives and recommended a new arrangement for its workers' compensation. The client chose to move before renewal.

The work continued at subsequent renewals. Later, we found a carrier offering monthly payroll reporting for the main policy, and the client chose that move too. Billing could follow reported payroll more closely as contracts changed, with a final audit still in place. We also continue reviewing insurance requirements in the firm's contracts against its operations and coverage, keeping the account current as new work begins.

A produce processor wanted to know whether its agriculture insurance program still made sense. The business processed and packed produce; it had no farming operations. It was also trying to manage insurance renewal at fiscal year-end, just as the CFO was closing the books.

We reviewed the operations and took a fresh look at the market, asking insurers how they would approach the business as a processor. We compared coverage and cost, then recommended moving the core coverage to a program suited to that work. The client chose to move before renewal.

Other policies needed their own decisions. On one, we advised keeping the existing coverage: a proposed rewrite would provide essentially the same insurance while requiring a new, nonrefundable annual premium ahead of a planned change. The client agreed. The core renewal also moved away from fiscal year-end, giving the CFO room to handle the two jobs separately.

After years of rising premiums, a property business received lower renewal prices. That created a choice: keep the savings, or use some of them to change what the insurance would do in a loss.

We recommended considering a lower deductible and a higher limit separately. To make the choice concrete, we illustrated an earthquake in an area where the business had several properties. The example showed that a lower deductible would leave less of that loss with the business and increase its modeled insurance recovery. The existing limit was enough for that illustrated loss; buying more limit served a different purpose, adding capacity for a larger catastrophe.

The client chose the lower deductible because the additional recovery shown in the example justified the extra premium. It also chose more limit because the additional capacity was available at an acceptable cost. Market savings and additional spending funded both changes.