Identifying Moral Hazard in Car Insurance Contracts

2015 ◽  
Vol 97 (2) ◽  
pp. 301-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarit Weisburd
Social Forces ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 583
Author(s):  
Margaret Levi ◽  
Carol Heimer

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alma Cohen

Abstract This paper analyzes the choice of deductible in insurance contracts that insure against a risk that, as is common, might materialize more than once during the life of the policy. As was established by Arrow (1963), from the perspective of risk-bearing costs, the optimal contract is one that uses an aggregate deductible that applies to the aggregate losses incurred over the life of the policy. Aggregate deductibles, however, are uncommon in practice. This paper identifies two disadvantages that aggregate deductibles have. Aggregate deductibles are shown to produce higher expected verification costs and moral hazard costs than contracts that apply a per-loss deductible to each loss that occurs. I further show that each of these disadvantages can make an aggregate deductible contact inferior to a contract with per loss deductibles. The results of the analysis can help explain the rare use of aggregate deductibles and, in addition, might explain why umbrella policies that cover all types of losses are rarely used.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 124-138
Author(s):  
Olavi-Jüri Luik ◽  
Mats Volberg

Introduction: this article looks into the central problem in insurance law, where the principle of “all or nothing” applied by insurance providers and legislators to moral hazard (if the risks of people are covered with insurance contracts then the people often change their risk behavior to involve higher risks by presuming that the concluded insurance contract always covers the loss incurred) is being replaced by the principle of proportionality in the modern insurance law of Western countries. Purpose: to identify significant methodological changes in determining the scope of performance of an insurance provider’s obligation caused by the application of the principle of proportionality. Methods: the authors use the approach of the Baltic Sea States (e.g. Estonia, Lithuania, Russia and Finland) and PEICL (Principles of European Insurance Contract Law1) in a comparative approach, analyzing the respective paradigmatic methodological shift (which currently among the named countries is directly reflected only in the Finnish Insurance Contract Act2) in the context of practical philosophy. Results: the paper demonstrates the necessity to change the paradigmatic legal methodology, according to which the principle of “all or nothing” would be replaced by the principle of proportionality.


1983 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 74-97 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ariel Rubinstein ◽  
Menahem E Yaari

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 75-95
Author(s):  
Iljoo Lee ◽  
Changjun Lee

Due to the difficulty in obtaining data on life insurance contracts, previous studies on moral hazard of life insurance are confined to conceptual discussion or surveys of Korean health panel. To fill this gap, using comprehensive data from Postal insurance market, we perform an empirical study on moral hazard of life insurance from the period of 2008 to 2013. Our empirical findings are summarized as follows. First, employing the Heckman (1979)'s two stage model, we find that having indemnity private health insurance increases the number and period of medical utilization. In addition, number of private health insurance has a positive and highly significant effect on the number of period of medical utilization. Our empirical finding indicates that in a life insurance market with asymmetric information, there exists a moral hazard in order to maximize economic utility.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document