Conor McAuley Apr 16, 2021:

Very well explained ph-b, thanks.

I think some drivers are only insured "pour compte propre", and this leads to big problems. I forget in which country -- France I think. I don't drive, but this shouldn't be allowed, it doesn't make sense.

ph-b (X) Apr 16, 2021:

compte propre/own account This is an insurance policy or the part of an insurance policy that covers the insured’s own property. Put simply, if one of your trees falls on both your house and your neighbour’s, your Homeowner’s policy may* cover the damage to your house and also the damage to your neighbour’s. The first part is the assurance pour compte propre part of your policy and the second, the assurance pour compte d’autrui part. You can take out insurance that covers only you and what belongs to you. This is what your ref. (Prof. Bocken) says under A.1.31. Or you can take out insurance that covers you and other parties**: “The Insured can insure his own interest (insurance for own account) or that of another (insurance for third-party account). » (https://docplayer.net/6500530-Dtv-cargo-insurance-conditions... under 1.1.4). There's a similar scenario here: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/319687/0001104659201... (2.05.b).

*This is just a simplified example - what matters of course is what your policy says in terms of covered risks.**Indeed, you must in some circumstances: motor, construction, etc.

Suzie Withers Apr 15, 2021:

I've worked in insurance and it's not a term I've really come across, but that was mostly in motor insurance, where it's *all* about whose fault it is and deciding who is going to pay for it!

I think perhaps the concept is more common in France?

But when I read the descriptions in French (of "pour compte propre") and English ("first party"), they seem to be the same thing.

Peter Shortall Apr 15, 2021:

Re Suzie's idea In an EN-FR question about "first party property insurance", one of the answerers (socratisv) added a note suggesting "assurance pour compte propre" as a possible translation of that EN term:
www.proz.com/kudoz/2943728

It wasn't the chosen answer, I grant you, but interesting that it's there!

Suzie Withers Apr 15, 2021:

https://c-r-l.com/content-hub/article/building-warranty-ever...

"One of the benefits of building warranty cover from a company such as CRL rather than relying on a developer or architect certificate is that *it is provided on a first-party material damage basis therefore no requirement to prove fault or negligence*. This means reduced stress and your claim can be settled much more quickly."

Suzie Withers Apr 15, 2021:

first party I think we might be talking about "first party" damage type policies, i.e. where the insurance company doesn't try to assign liability and recover costs from (or pay out to) a third party, they just pay the first party (policyholder) based on what's defined in the policy.

Wendy Cummings (asker) Apr 15, 2021:

@Phil The phrases quoted in the question are the only times it appears in the document. The document as a whole describes a number of insurance policies included under a "Master Policy" for a large banking group (e.g. cyber risk, directors' liability, crime insurance, buildings damage) and the role of the insurance officers.
The document mentions both external and captive insurers, and brokers. But otherwise it is really quite vague and mentions a lot of the policies/types only very briefly.

philgoddard Apr 15, 2021:

Could it be self insurance? You say it's a kind of policy, but does it mention an insurance company?