inauspicious and informal gathering at Edward Lloyd’s London coffee house in 1688 to ringing the ship’s bell in
a futuristic glass escalator marketplace, Lloyd’s of London has endured through feast and famine. From Tower Street to the Royal Exchange
at Cornhill, on to 12 Leadenhall Street and finally to One Lime Street, Lloyd’s of London has been the world's leading insurance market, the second largest commercial insurer and sixth largest re-insurer.
origin of insuring risk is a concept that is simple, yet masked in complexity. Lloyds
has traditionally been identified with the shipping. As a trading nation English
merchants sought to insure their vessels and cargo from the perils of a sea voyage.
Wealthy individuals would each take a share of a risk, then signed their names one beneath the other, on the policy
together with the amount they agreed to cover. For this reason they were known as 'underwriters'. Individual Lloyds insurer members have been know as “Names”.
like in every field of enterprise, acted as agents to facilitate transactions and foster deals. Over time, a group of professionals, know as External Names evolved
into managing the affairs of Names, especially those who viewed their role as a passive player. Syndicates formed that specialized in certain coverage, which attracted groups of Names to accept
the risk of underwriting. External Names would negotiate premiums, structure
agreements and accept or reject business brought to the floor by Brokers.
of business evolved into categories: Marine, Non-Marine, Motor and Aviation. Names
for their percentage of premiums accepted the concept of unlimited liability. Thus
coming into the lexicon - spread the risk - all Lloyd’s Names agreed by the articles of their association, that if any
of them fail to meet obligations or goes bankrupt, each of the other members will be equally responsible for those debts,
to the full extent of their own personal wealth.
such risk is not for the faint of heart. However, the reward from the premiums
on insurance policies, minus the payout for claims and the administration of business costs, had a very enticing benefit called
is one of those gems that make life worth living. Leverage is a key feature that
heightens the potential for profit. During the later part of the last century,
3 to 1 and as high as nearly 4 to 1 times the amount of deposited funds that is provided for security, entitled underwriting
of three to four times the amount of the deposit. This business model was the
main motivator to assume the accompanied risks of unlimited liability.
such as re-insurance, which is essentially laying off the final obligation for the price on indemnity against the amount of
syndicate underwriting, help to reduce the peril of unsustainable cash calls. MAPA’s,
basically a mutual funds approach to underwriting, offered to spread the risk among a full range of syndicates, at a lower
exposure. The Central Fund is publicized as a general cash reserve and the PTF,
Premium Trust Funds (a personal reserve) as a further guarantee. For the past
several years, Lloyd’s has assessed its members 1% of their allocated overall premium limit. Lloyd’s can also
make a proportionate call of $426 million upon the members’ PTF’s without their consent.
this centuries old financial formula, panic struck at the core of stability during the 1980’s and early 90’s,
due to unwise risk/reward underwriting, sloppy business practices, poorly written contracts and huge legal settlements. With this general background, fast forward to the new era of corporate capital.
majority of Names who had been involved in costly litigation against Lloyd's accepted its proposed settlement offer and its
Reconstruction and Renewal Plan, and Lloyd's began to move forward blessed by a new world of corporate capital investment. But what will the new Lloyd's
look like in the coming years? Will corporate involvement in Lloyd's restore Lloyd's to its preeminent position as international
insurance marketplace of the world? How will the remaining Names at Lloyd's fare, given the fact that they still face unlimited
liability a la the old regime, while corporate capital enjoys limited liability?”
handwriting was on the wall for any individual Name. As the price
of reorganization, the very essence of gearing was stripped from the equation. Old
members who endured the tough years still retained significant liabilities from syndicates that did not close and exposure
to open ended legal actions that continue into the future. The promise of the
Equitas bailout with corporate coffers recapitalization was really the crowding out of unwanted Names, now that their wealth
was sucked dry. The errors and omissions certainly hit new heights with the steamrolling
of the society for the benefit of the management and the detriment of traditional Names.
Toby Greenbury, partner in the London-based
law firm D.J. Freeman, sums up the mindset that destroyed the venerable bastion of individual enterprise. Greenbury is adamant about the importance of corporate capital at present day Lloyd's. "A remarkable change
has taken place at Lloyd's in just a few short years," he said in interviews at his London offices. "Prior to 1993, only individual
investors were allowed to invest. But, with the heavy losses that came about because of the 1989-92 years of account, Lloyd's
was desperately in need of capital. Individual investors, burned severely by those losses, were not anxious to put more money
in. So Lloyd's turned to the corporate community." According to Greenbury, the shift to limited capital did the trick as far
as the venture capitalists were concerned.
Christian Milton of AIG stated at a law symposium back in 1996:
“We have no doubt that Lloyd's is evolving its capital structure with its decision to introduce corporate capital, which
really started as part of its business plan back in 1993. Now, we just have to distinguish the Names from the corporate capital.
We should expect to see the diminishing role of the Names, which we believe is going to happen more and more, with an ever
increasing role for corporate capital. But we have to be careful with corporate capital. If we were to look at the press over
the last couple of weeks, corporate capital according to recent Lloyd's numbers represents only about thirty percent of the
this insurance industry stance with The American Names Association white page presented in March 2002.
to opening its doors to foreigners in 1970, Lloyd’s membership was limited to British citizens. Between 1970 and 1988,
Lloyd’s membership grew from 6,000 U.K. citizens to a peak of 32,433 including over 3,400 Americans. Following accusations
by many of the new members that they had been fraudulently induced to become members, over 22,500 withdrew. Under pressure
to replace the lost capacity, in 1993 Lloyd’s opened its doors to limited liability corporate memberships. By 1997,
45% of Lloyd’s capacity was provided by corporate members. Today, there are only 2,490 individuals actively trading.
Over 76% of Lloyd’s $17.4 billion of underwriting capacity is provided by 900 corporate members.
not come as a surprise to those who have been monitoring Lloyd’s since 1996 that the cornerstone of the proposed
reforms is the phasing out of the remaining individual Names.”
From the Lloyd’s Market Report in 2004: “752 limited liability corporate members account for 87.5 percent of Lloyd’s capacity in 2004 (£13.1
billion), up marginally from 87 percent in 2003. Aligned capacity – management
and capital forming part of the same corporate group – has increased by 8 percent to £11.1 billion in 2004. NameCos,
Scottish Limited Partnerships and Group Conversion Vehicles, all of which are formed to enable Names to convert their unlimited
underwriting into limited liability, supplied £0.95 billion of capacity.”
Setting aside the sorry record towards Names that prompts this sentiment:
"I have never used the word conspiracy, but what I do say is that information which was privy to a handful of people at
the very top of Lloyd's was not properly disseminated." (John Donner, Chairman, Donner Underwriting Agencies, 1984),
we are still left with a designed strategy to recast a beacon of merchant based capitalism into a collaborator of Crown commerce.
The following assessment sums up the transfer from individual risk taking to
coordinated corporate control. "Lloyd's is a business corporation so powerful that it has obtained from the British legislature
substantial immunities." (Richards v Lloyd's, US Circ. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, March 6, 1997)
The ship of state, along with greedy managerial professionals has torpedoed the
flagship of the insurance fleet. It was not just the hazard of nature or even
the incompetence of External Names underwriting that sunk individual Names with the Piper Alpha oil rig fire disaster. The marvel of seeping tea, while insuring coffee at Edward Lloyd’s house has
been replaced with High Court litigation and summary judgment, in the protection of the corporate global juggernaut. The syndicate they operate has become an organization of destruction that even Lloyd’s
of London won’t insure.
NAMES provided the wealth and stand the risks. Justifiably they should
retain the equity ownership of the society. But even the sale of One Lime Street did not compensate individual NAMES.
The demise of Lloyds need not be judged as a mere causality of the worldwide economy. What can be more global than the
international insurance market? Witnessing the scuttling of market enterprise for corporate manipulation is tragic.
It seems that conducting business for over three hundred years doesn’t insure an inheritance of mercantilism for the
individual. Corporations hate competition.
SARTRE - January 31, 2005