Hi. Please remind me what the thinking is about this:
Suppose I am principally garaged in suburban territory A, I have an accident with someone who is principally garaged in suburban territory B, and we have an auto accident in crowded city territory C where we are both declared equally at fault.
So my claims experience goes into the ratemaking bucket for territory A, the other driver’s claims experience goes into the ratemaking bucket for territory B, but shouldn’t the claims experience really go into the ratemaking bucket for territory C? Why don’t we do this? Do we code territory of occurrence?
By the way, I once saw an enormous claim under Michigan no-fault, by an out-of-state driver who had the accident in Michigan. The carrier paid the Michigan claim, but the carrier was unable to get reimbursement from the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association Fund because the carrier was not licensed in Michigan. (Yes, I know the law has changed on mandatory buying unlimited no-fault.)