Craig Richard Smiddy
President and CEO
Sure, Greg. I'll take both of those. Yeah. So, you know, we start beginning of the year with what we believe to be a conservative loss pick. And from there, as we go through each week, we study what's happening with case reserves, and also what's happening with paid losses. And we take those into consideration, and look at what trend we think that that implies. We take a closer look at severity. We take a close look at frequency. And come up with an overall trend. So what we saw in commercial auto this year for the better part of the year was trends. We said, I think, on prior calls, we were saying trends in the low teens, and that we were obtaining rate increases that were at least commensurate with those trends. And that was the case. As we got toward the end of the year, while we did not notice any paid claim difference, we did notice that case reserves were higher. And, as we communicate, we're conservative. And if we see case reserves at a higher level, we'll react. We did that, I think, a couple years ago, same exact thing. Where trends all of a sudden moved a bit higher than what we were seeing earlier in the year. And, as such, trends now look to be rather than in the low teens, the mid-teens. And as such, the three percentage point increase to the accident year loss ratio. We'd rather be conservative and go with what we're seeing in case reserves as opposed to being relaxed and relying on paid losses. So, you know, I just point out it's not something we missed. It's and to give everyone a little more color around that, you know, loss trends move. They're volatile. We follow them regularly. You know? Like, daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly, and it's always a moving target. It's impossible to instantaneously know what today or tomorrow's loss trend is. No one has a crystal ball. And the best anyone can do is make a projection based on current observations, and that's exactly what we do. We make a projection based on what we're seeing, and that's it's usually a conservative projection. In this case, a conservative projection around what we saw in the movement between case reserves in the beginning of the year as opposed to case reserves more toward the end of the year. And just to underscore this a little bit more, when I make the statement that it's impossible to precisely and instantaneously know what your trend's gonna be, it takes time from the first notice of loss to the time that an adjuster is able to set ultimate case reserves. You know, at the time of first notice of loss, the ultimate number of bodily injuries, the severity of the injuries, whether or not there's attorney representation, are all things that are not usually immediately known, and it takes time for that to play out. And that's why it's impossible to instantaneously know what your severity is until you get that kind of information and the year progresses and it comes through in your case reserves. So hopefully, that provides a little more color around what we saw, how we reacted, and you know, it's really 100% consistent with what we've communicated to all of our investors and analysts. We observe higher loss trends, we immediately react by adjusting the loss ratio. And, as you saw in the fourth quarter, as I mentioned in my comments, we immediately react with rate. And rate increases in commercial auto accelerated. In the fourth quarter and now are upwards of 16% compared to I think we were at 14% last quarter. So and we'll keep doing exactly that. So I'll move on to your second question. Regarding the $17.5 million offset we had on workers' comp favorable development. And that came from, as we said in the release, a large deductible program where the losses from prior years had developed. And in this case, there was a credit risk exposure, so we ended up with insufficient collateral and on large deductible programs when that happens. That's something that then falls to us. And, accordingly, we have to put up the reserves ourselves. So that's what happened. In this quarter, and you've been following us long enough to know that those kind of losses are somewhat unique and certainly, in our forty, forty-five year history, that's a pretty big number for us relative to past experience. And 99 out of 100 times, we have enough collateral to take care of things even if losses do develop unfavorably in prior years. But in this one instance, there was insufficient collateral.