Earthquake Commission (EQC) chief executive Ian Simpson says the organisation's reinsurance cover had already doubled in price before the earthquakes that hit Christchurch last Monday, June 13.
Simpson made the comments in an interview with The Listener.
He is adamant the pending court case between the EQC and the Insurance Council wasn't slowing payments, and said he thought the EQC model had worked "extremely well" given the scale of events in Christchurch since the first earthquake on September 4 last year. He also rubbished talk the latest big quakes - on June 13 - would add NZ$6 billion to the overall costs of the quakes since September.
"There was that number that was quoted from a US modelling firm who said [June 13] would cost NZ$6 billion, which is just ludicrous. That had caused a huge amount of consternation in the markets," Simpson said.
Reinsurance costs double
The EQC had just completed renewing its reinsurance policies for June 1, Simpson said.
It has been expected the EQC levy paid by homeowners may have to be hiked from NZ$69 currently to about NZ$180 due to rising reinsurance costs faced by EQC, which would come as general insurance policies also become more expensive in the wake of the quakes.
"In general across the reinsurance market, and this is before Monday, rates had probably just about doubled," Simpson told The Listener.
"And you’d need to talk to other insurers about what conditions they are seeing at the moment as they try to put their renewals in place. So before Monday, EQC’s reinsurance cost went up by 50% but we renewed half the programme. The other half was already locked in at prior prices. So the half we renewed is twice the price," Simpson said.
EQC had 50 reinsurers, Simpson said. The EQC's reinsurance cover is triggered when an event had the EQC paying out more than NZ$1.5 billion, with reinsurance then kicking in to pay the next NZ$2.5 billion in costs. Only the September 4 and February 22 quakes would result in the EQC paying out more than NZ$1.5 billion for each event, meaning its reinsurance agreements had only been triggered twice.
"Each one of them has the same terms, all 50. But the programme itself is smoothed over a three year period," Simpson told The Listener.
He was hoping the situation would have calmed down by when the EQC had to again renew its reinsurance cover in a year's time.
Court case not affecting payments
Simpson tried to clear up the reason why EQC and the Insurance Council were going to the High Court to determine who paid what in certain circumstances. The court case is due to be held in Wellington sometime in the next few weeks. A spokesman for the High Court told interest.co.nz on Tuesday morning no date had been set yet. Insurance company Tower has launched a separate proceeding on the same issue.
"We are going to court because there is a view among the insurers that the EQC act is not clear on what conditions the NZ$100,000 worth of building cover reinstates," Simpson said.
"Basically there is a difference of opinion on the terms under which the cover renews. So on one level, there are lots of areas where we do agree. So if someone renews their home insurance policy then clearly the EQC cover reinstates along with their home insurance policy," he said.
"So the disagreement is within that 12 month period of the insurance policy, what triggers a reinstatement of EQC cover. And very loosely, the insurers believe that every aftershock triggers a reinstatement of EQC cover, and we take the wording that’s in the Act that says EQC cover reinstates effectively when we make a payment on the claim."
"It’s a discussion. As you have probably seen from press reports, we haven’t let this become an argument. We’ve approached it in a very sensible and grown-up manner. This is about how you read the EQC legislation. So we can sit there and try argue and compromise, which actually doesn’t particularly work well for either of our reinsurers if we start compromising. Or we can go collaboratively to the High Court and get a declaratory judgment on how the New Zealand legislation should be interpreted," Simpson told The Listener.
The dispute had "absolutely" not delayed any aspect of EQC's payments.
"We are working hard with the insurers to make sure it doesn’t delay any payments they might want to make either," Simpson said.
Scheme works well
Simpson said he considered the EQC scheme had worked well, given the scale of events in Christchurch.
"I suspect that within the next year or two every aspect of New Zealand’s response and the EQC response and the model will be reviewed," he said.
"I would say though that considering that we charge NZ$69 a year including GST to everyone who buys insurance, and we have just covered two extremely large international scale events I would say the scheme has worked – and I’m talking about the cover, not the organisation – but the cover has worked extremely well."
11 Comments
I would say the scheme has worked – and I’m talking about the cover, not the organisation
Exactly right
Homer Simpson would have done a better job.
How can they possibly say there are no delays! EQC assessed two of our properties as being over cap 6 months ago and we have not seen one dime. A further 4 were assessed 3 months ago as overcap and still not one cent!
Ask the bastards how much they've paid out since Feb 22, it's next to nothing, despite assessing 20 odd thousand of the worst affected properties. They are theives, trying to pass damage off as pre-existing. Going into red stickered buildings pricing up to paint and replaster buildings that are barely hanging on to life, without fixing the underlying problems because the moronic inspectors believe that insurance only covers repairing "what you see"!
It's a farce and we've all had a gutsful.
We have paid $26,000 in annual premiums since the quakes on properties which are largely writeoffs or need major work..
At this rate we won't be spending one more cent in this country of theiving bastards.
Screw this Government and the businesses (insurers) that have abandoned their obligations to their citizens and their customers.
Incompetence and stupidity should not be valid excuses for inaction.
Surely they shouldn't be self assessing themselves. Surely they need an enquiry into the performance of EQC, to see if they are performing up to par.
It is good we have got an election coming up, as the eq will probably be the number 1 issue. A pity labour are so weak at the moment.
I ask again.
What wonders me most, despite strong seismic activities including severe liquefaction problems, why is there no evacuation plan in place ? There should be in my opinion more activities with local governments/ authorities to temporarily/ permanently place people/ businesses in safe(r) locations within the
Canterbury region.
In stead of crime and other stupid programs, why is there no coordination/ coverage/ discussion forums in the NZTVmedia in order to help affected people/ families/ businesses ? This is a national catastrophe affecting the entire nation.
What a hideous night of Earthquakes..........AUS looking about 70 percent good now, my kids were very very scared last night , they were shaking scared and as a parent it is something that I want to stop, didnt get much sleep, got more damage out south West in this one than any others..I really dont know how much more people can take...is there much point fixing anything when these come along and you are back to square one....OVER IT...In Canterbury owning a house is a HIGH risk investment thats for sure.
Yeah not too much sleep here either. Particularly at night when it's quiet you can hear the rumble and the first start of a quake some time before the full force hits. Then the uncertainty of how big it's going to be, and even then if it dies down, it might get stronger again (as with both the 6.3 magnitude quakes). Can now appreciate a little bit better what it must have been like in the blitz, having doodle bugs flying over, then engines stopping, then silence, then destruction, perhaps your house, or probably not. I wonder if it's the same when being attacked by US drones, whether you hear anything before the event, or whether the explosion is the first sign.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.