Having an engineer from the broker’s side represent the insured during annual risk engineering inspections can be beneficial for several reasons:
Why It Might Be Beneficial:
- Technical Expertise: An engineer can provide technical insights and ensure that the insured’s operations are accurately represented. This can help in identifying and mitigating risks more effectively.
- Advocacy: The engineer can act as an advocate for the insured, ensuring that the insurer’s recommendations are fair and reasonable. They can also help negotiate any necessary changes or improvements.
- Compliance and Safety: Engineers can help ensure that the insured is in compliance with industry standards and regulations, which can reduce the likelihood of claims and improve overall safety.
- Detailed Understanding: Engineers can provide a detailed understanding of the insured’s processes and operations, which can help in tailoring the insurance program to better fit the insured’s needs.
Why it might not be beneficial
- Cost: Providing an engineer can be costly for the broker, and these costs might be passed on to the insured.
- Potential Conflicts: There could be potential conflicts of interest if the engineer is seen as representing the broker’s interests rather than the insured’s.
- Sufficiency of Insurer’s Inspection: If the insurer’s risk engineering inspections are thorough and unbiased, the additional presence of an engineer from the broker might be redundant.
Conclusion:
Ultimately, the decision should be based on the specific needs and circumstances of the insured. If the insured’s operations are complex and high-risk, having an engineer from the broker’s side could provide significant value. However, for less complex operations, the additional cost and potential conflicts might outweigh the benefits.
Energy Risk Engineering Insights 