Markerstudy Group

The Strait of Hormuz just became a motor claims problem… Not something you’d usually say. But the latest developments — including Iran effectively turning the Strait into a “toll booth” for global shipping — could have a very real, very material impact on Third Party motor claims costs. 1. Fuel costs = immediate indemnity pressure With ~20% of global oil flowing through the Strait, disruption has already driven sharp price spikes. Higher fuel costs don’t just hit consumers — they hit claims economics: * Increased repair costs (energy-intensive supply chains) * Higher vehicle recovery and storage costs * Inflation across credit hire daily rates We’ve seen this playbook before… just faster this time. 2. Supply chain shock = longer lifecycles Shipping disruption + war risk pricing (now running into tens of millions per voyage) is already constraining global movement of goods. That means: * Delays in parts → longer repair times * Longer repair times → increased credit hire exposure * Increased hire duration → exponential indemnity creep And that’s before we even get to EV parts dependency… 3. Insurance market ripple → cost of risk rises Marine insurers are repricing aggressively, governments are stepping in, and the market is being stress-tested in real time. That pressure doesn’t stay in marine. It flows into: * Reinsurance costs * Capital models * Ultimately… pricing and reserving assumptions across motor 4. Behavioural shift = more aggressive TP strategies When costs rise, behaviours change. Expect: * Third parties doubling down on non-fault capture strategies * Increased credit hire penetration * More friction in liability resolution Sound familiar? 5. The big one: volatility is back What this really signals is a return to macro-driven claims volatility. Not driven by frequency. Not driven by fraud. But by global geopolitical events feeding directly into indemnity spend. So what? For motor claims leaders, this is another reminder: - Intervention strategy isn’t optional — it’s critical - Cycle time control = cost control - Supply chain visibility is now a claims capability, not a procurement one Because when global events like this hit… If you don’t control the claim — someone else will. Curious how others are thinking about this 👇 Are you already seeing early signs in hire, repair, or total loss costs?

It was great to share my perspective with Insurance Post this week on how ChatGPT and other LLMs could reshape insurance and why the industry is approaching a fork in the road. I’d be really interested in how others across the market are thinking about this. Which path are you preparing for?

Despite advice to the contrary I am delighted to be taking part ( at least for a minute or two ) and supporting this great cause !

One of the most complex — and underrated — problems in engineering is naming things correctly. It's not just about writing; it's about finding the right balance. You might come across code like this: const x = getData(); const y = process(x); const z = send(y); This is short and clean, but is it really helpful? On the other hand, you might see: const processedActivePremiumUsersFromLast30DaysResponse = ... This is descriptive, but can it be hard to read? Then there's the classic debate over naming conventions: camelCase vs snake_case vs PascalCase. Most teams face the following challenges: 👉 Too short → unclear 👉 Too long → overwhelming 👉 Inconsistent casing → confusing The real skill lies in finding the balance: ✔ Names that carry meaning ✔ Names that are easy to scan ✔ Consistency across the codebase Remember, code is written once but read hundreds of times. Good engineers make code work, while senior engineers make it easy to understand. Which do you prefer — short or descriptive names? And how strict are you about naming conventions?