Judicial and regulatory environments need indemnity

Everyone considers the traditional subjects of insurance: property damage, workplace injuries, employee dishonesty and management liability.

In a white paper issued by Hub International, however, it is suggested that state-of-the-art insurance design has shifted with judicial and regulatory environments, exposing unwitting buyers to greater risk.

The white paper says risks routinely excluded or sharply limited by conventional property and casualty insurance policies include:

  • Professional liability, arising from the rendering of, or failure to render, professional services. Although few policies precisely define the term, they’re generally held to be services requiring advanced credentials or licensure.
  • Sexual misconduct liability, arising from actual or alleged sexual abuse or exploitation. Although mainstream commercial policies are generally silent on the exposure, those marketed to organizations serving vulnerable populations are frequently modified by riders that bar coverage.
  • Information risk, associated with network breaches, operational error and accidents causing loss or damage to computer networks, digital assets and unauthorized release of personally identifiable information. Traditional property, general liability, crime and management liability insurances provide only partial, fragmented coverage.
  • Multimedia liability, arising from libel, slander, defamation and infringement of intellectual property in oral, printed, broadcast, electronic or internet media, including social media. At best, traditional general liability insurance covers only personal injury, and copyright and trademark infringement are covered only in connection with advertising.
  • International risks, associated with overseas travel, operations, or commerce. Domestic property and casualty insurance policies generally respond only for claims brought in the USA, its territories or possessions, leaving any global business exposed for claims brought abroad.