e10vk
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010
or
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from ______________ to ______________
Commission File Number 001-33251
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
65-0231984
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
1110 West Commercial Blvd., Suite 100, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309
(Address of principal executive offices)
Registrants telephone number, including area code: (954) 958-1200
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
Title of each class
|
|
Name of each exchange on which registered |
|
|
|
Common Stock, $.01 Par Value
|
|
NYSE Amex LLC |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None.
Indicate by check mark if
the registrant is a
well-known seasoned issuer,
as defined in Rule 405 of
the Securities Act. o Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark if
the registrant is not
required to file reports
pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Act. o Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark
whether the registrant (1)
has filed all reports
required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of
1934 during the preceding 12
months (or for such shorter
period that the registrant
was required to file such
reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing
requirements for the past 90
days. þ Yes o No
Indicate by check mark
whether the registrant has
submitted electronically and
posted on its corporate Web
site, if any, every
Interactive Data File
required to be submitted and
posted pursuant to Rule 405
of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405
of this chapter) during the
preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the
registrant was required to
submit and post such files). o Yes o No
Indicate by check mark if
disclosure of delinquent
filers pursuant to Item 405
of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405
of this chapter) is not
contained herein, and will
not be contained, to the
best of registrants
knowledge, in definitive
proxy or information
statements incorporated by
reference in Part III of
this Form 10-K or any
amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark
whether the registrant is a
large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a
smaller reporting company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark
whether the registrant is a
shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the Act). o Yes þ No
State the aggregate market
value of the voting and
non-voting common equity held
by non-affiliates computed by
reference to the price at
which the common equity was
sold as of June 30, 2010:
$94,450,277.
Indicate the number of shares
outstanding of Common Stock
of Universal Insurance
Holdings, Inc. as of March
24, 2011: 39,387,998
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
Page No. |
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
16 |
|
|
22 |
|
|
22 |
|
|
22 |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
25 |
|
|
43 |
|
|
45 |
|
|
85 |
|
|
85 |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
86 |
|
|
87 |
|
|
87 |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
91 |
Exhibit 21: List of Subsidiaries |
|
|
Exhibit 23.1: CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERD PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM |
|
|
Exhibit 31.1: CERTIFICATION |
|
|
Exhibit 31.2: CERTIFICATION |
|
|
Exhibit 32: CERTIFICATION |
|
|
2
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Information called for in PART III of this Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the
registrants definitive Proxy Statement to be filed within 120 days of the close of the
registrants fiscal year in connection with the registrants annual meeting of shareholders.
3
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
THE COMPANY
Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. (UIH or the Company) was originally organized as
Universal Heights, Inc. under the laws of the State of Delaware on November 13, 1990. The Company
changed its name to Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. on January 12, 2001. Its principal
executive offices are located at 1110 West Commercial Boulevard, Suite 100, Fort Lauderdale,
Florida 33309, and its telephone number is (954) 958-1200.
In April 1997, the Company organized a subsidiary, Universal Property & Casualty Insurance
Company (UPCIC), as part of its strategy to take advantage of what management believed to be
profitable business and growth opportunities in the residential property and casualty insurance
marketplace. UPCIC was formed to participate in the transfer of homeowners insurance policies from
the Florida Residential Property and Casualty Joint Underwriting Association (JUA). UPCICs
application to become a Florida licensed property and casualty insurance company was filed with the
Florida Office of Insurance Regulation (OIR) on May 14, 1997 and approved on October 29, 1997.
UPCICs proposal to begin operations through the acquisition of homeowners insurance policies
issued by the JUA was approved by the JUA on May 21, 1997, subject to certain minimum
capitalization and other requirements.
The Florida Insurance Code requires that companies must maintain capitalization equivalent to
the greater of ten percent of the insurers total liabilities or $4.0 million. UPCICs statutory
capital and surplus was $115,926,200 at December 31, 2010 and exceeded the minimum capital and
surplus requirements. UPCIC is also required to adhere to prescribed premium-to-capital surplus
ratios.
In September 2006, the Company initiated the process of acquiring all of the outstanding
common stock of Atlas Florida Financial Corporation, which owned all of the outstanding common
stock of Sterling Premium Finance Company, Inc. (Sterling), from the Companys Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Operating Officer for $50,000, which approximated Sterlings book value. The
Company received approval of the acquisition from the OIR. Sterling has been renamed Atlas Premium
Finance Company and commenced offering premium finance services in November 2007.
Blue Atlantic Reinsurance Corporation (BARC) was incorporated in Florida on November 9, 2007
as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company to be a reinsurance intermediary broker. BARC became
licensed by the Florida Department of Financial Services as a reinsurance intermediary broker on
January 4, 2008.
The Company filed an application with the OIR on June 23, 2008 to open a second property and
casualty insurance subsidiary, Infinity Property and Casualty Insurance Company (Infinity), in
the State of Florida. Infinity was renamed American Platinum Property and Casualty Insurance
Company (American Platinum). On October 1, 2008, the Company signed a consent order agreeing to
the terms and conditions for the issuance of a certificate of authority to American Platinum. The
final approval and issuance of the certificate of authority was granted by the OIR on December 2,
2008.
The Company has evolved into a vertically integrated insurance holding company, which through
its various subsidiaries, covers substantially all aspects of insurance underwriting, distribution
and claims processing.
INSURANCE BUSINESS
The Companys primary product is homeowners insurance. The Companys criteria for selecting
insurance policies includes, but is not limited to, the use of specific policy forms, coverage
amounts on buildings and contents and required compliance with local building codes. Also, to
improve underwriting and manage risk, the Company utilizes standard industry modeling techniques
for hurricane and windstorm exposure. Ninety-eight percent of UPCICs in-force policies as of
December 31, 2010 were policies with coverage including wind risks in the states of Florida, North
Carolina, South Carolina and Hawaii. The average premium for a policy with wind coverage is
approximately $1,155.
UPCIC is evaluating possible participation with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
to become authorized to write and service flood insurance policies under the Write Your Own (WYO)
Program and continues to evaluate policy administration requirements for the program in light of
expected updates. Management may consider underwriting other types of policies in the future,
subject to approval by the appropriate regulatory
4
authorities. See Item 1, Competition under Factors Affecting Operating Results and Market
Price of Stock for a discussion of the material conditions and uncertainties that may affect
UPCICs ability to obtain additional policies.
As of December 31, 2010, UPCIC was licensed to transact insurance business in the seven states
of Florida, North Carolina, South Carolina, Hawaii, Georgia, Maryland and Massachusetts. The State
of North Carolina Department of Insurance has restricted UPCIC to writing no more than $12.0
million of direct premiums in each of the first two full calendar years after which such
restriction may be lifted. There is no assurance that UPCIC will be successful in obtaining
licenses in additional states and no prediction of when, if licensed, the Company will commence
operations in any of these states.
As of December 31, 2010, the geographical distribution of UPCICs policies-in-force and total
insured values were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geographical area |
|
Policies-In-Force |
|
|
% |
|
Total Insured Value |
|
|
% |
|
Florida Counties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miami-Dade, Broward
& Palm Beach |
|
|
184,486 |
|
|
|
31.6 |
% |
|
$ |
40,319,049,846 |
|
|
|
31.4 |
% |
Pinellas &
Hillsborough |
|
|
72,596 |
|
|
|
12.5 |
% |
|
|
15,800,306,880 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
% |
Lee & Collier |
|
|
65,207 |
|
|
|
11.2 |
% |
|
|
12,707,136,792 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
% |
Brevard &
Indian River |
|
|
31,653 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
% |
|
|
6,547,873,339 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
% |
Manatee & Sarasota |
|
|
36,753 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
7,020,463,634 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
% |
Escambia |
|
|
24,100 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
6,592,853,082 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
% |
St. Lucie & Martin |
|
|
28,977 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
6,295,296,072 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
% |
Duval |
|
|
13,623 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
% |
|
|
2,863,557,920 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
% |
All Other Counties |
|
|
116,964 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
% |
|
|
26,976,468,284 |
|
|
|
21.0 |
% |
|
Florida-Totals |
|
|
574,359 |
|
|
|
98.4 |
% |
|
$ |
125,123,005,848 |
|
|
|
97.3 |
% |
All other states |
|
|
9,519 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
3,428,605,294 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
Total |
|
|
583,878 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
128,551,611,142 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
On October 19, 2009, UPCIC received approval for a premium rate increase for its homeowners
program within the State of Florida. The premium rate increase averaged approximately 14.6 percent
statewide. The effective dates for the premium rate increase were October 22, 2009 for new
business and December 11, 2009 for renewal business. On November 3, 2009, UPCIC received approval
for a premium rate increase for its dwelling fire program within the State of Florida. The premium
rate increase averaged approximately 14.8 percent statewide. The effective dates for the premium
rate increase were November 5, 2009 for new business and December 29, 2009 for renewal business.
This rate increase had a positive impact on results during 2010 which the Company expects will
continue into 2011.
UPCIC filed a premium rate change for homeowners insurance programs with the Florida OIR on
November 5, 2010. The rate increase, which will result in an average premium increase of
approximately 14.9 percent statewide, was approved by the OIR on February 3, 2011. The effective
dates for the rate increase are February 7, 2011 for new business and March 28, 2011 for renewal
business. UPCIC expects the approved premium rate increases to have a favorable effect on premiums
written and earned in future months as new and renewal policies are written at the higher rates.
OPERATIONS
The Company is a vertically integrated insurance holding company. The Company, through its
wholly owned subsidiaries, is currently engaged in insurance underwriting, distribution and claims.
UPCIC generates revenues primarily from the collection of premiums. Universal Risk Advisors, Inc.
(URA), the Companys managing general agent, generates revenue through policy fee income and
other administrative fees from the marketing of UPCICs insurance products through the Companys
distribution network. All underwriting, rating, policy issuance, reinsurance negotiations, and
certain administration functions for UPCIC are performed by URA. The Company formed a claims
adjusting company, Universal Adjusting Corporation, which adjusts UPCIC claims, and an inspection
company, Universal Inspection Corporation, which performs property inspections for homeowners
insurance policies underwritten by UPCIC.
5
Atlas Premium Finance Company offers premium finance services to policyholders of UPCIC. BARC
performs reinsurance negotiations on behalf of URA for UPCIC. Universal Logistics Corporation
assists with operational duties associated with the day-to-day business of the Company.
American Platinum is authorized to write homeowners, multi peril and inland marine coverage on
homes valued in excess of $1.0 million. Additionally, the new subsidiary may write excess flood
insurance on homes valued in excess of $250,000. As of December 31, 2010, American Platinum had
not yet underwritten any policies.
The Company also generates income by investing available funds in accordance with investment
policies adopted by the Board of Directors. The Companys principal investment objective is to
maximize total rate of return after federal income taxes while maintaining liquidity and minimizing
risk consistent with and subject to certain regulatory requirements and limitations.
AGENCY OPERATIONS
Universal Florida Insurance Agency was incorporated in Florida on July 2, 1998 and Coastal
Homeowners Insurance Specialists, Inc. was incorporated in Florida on July 2, 2001, each as wholly
owned subsidiaries of the Company to solicit voluntary business. These entities are a part of the
Companys agency operations, which seek to generate income from commissions, premium financing
referral fees and the marketing of ancillary services.
FACTORS AFFECTING OPERATING RESULTS AND MARKET PRICE OF STOCK
The Company and its subsidiaries operate in a rapidly changing environment that involves a
number of uncertainties, many of which are beyond the Companys control. This report contains, in
addition to historical information, forward-looking statements that involve risks and
uncertainties. The words expect, estimate, anticipate, believe, intend, plan and
similar expressions and variations thereof are intended to identify forward-looking statements. The
Companys actual results could differ materially from those set forth in or implied by any
forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but
are not limited to, those uncertainties discussed below as well as those discussed elsewhere in
this report.
Nature of the Companys Business
Factors affecting the sectors of the insurance industry in which the Company operates may
subject the Company to significant fluctuations in operating results. These factors include
competition, catastrophe losses and general economic conditions including interest rate changes, as
well as legislative initiatives, the regulatory environment, the frequency of litigation, the size
of judgments, severe weather conditions, climate changes or cycles, the role of federal or state
government in the insurance or financial markets, judicial or other authoritative interpretations
of laws and policies, and the availability and cost of reinsurance. Specifically, the homeowners
insurance market, which comprises the bulk of the Companys current operations, is influenced by
many factors, including state and federal laws, market conditions for homeowners insurance and
residential plans. Additionally, an economic downturn could result in fewer home sales and less
demand for new homeowners seeking insurance.
The Company believes that a substantial portion of its future growth will depend on its
ability, among other things, to successfully implement its business strategy, including expanding
the Companys product offering by underwriting and marketing additional insurance products and
programs through its distribution network, further penetrating the Florida market by establishing
relationships with additional independent agents in order to expand its distribution network and to
further disperse its geographic risk by expanding into other geographical areas outside the state
of Florida. Any future growth is contingent on various factors, including the availability of
adequate capital, the Companys ability to hire and train additional qualified personnel,
regulatory requirements, the competitive environment, and rating agency considerations. There is
no assurance that the Company will be successful in expanding its business, that the Companys
existing infrastructure will be able to support additional expansion or that any new business will
be profitable. Moreover, as the Company expands its insurance products and programs and the
Companys mix of business changes, there can be no assurance that the Company will be able to
maintain or improve its profit margins or other operating results. In addition, Florida has been,
and is currently experiencing an economic downturn and diminution of real estate values that could
affect the premium rates the Company charges for homeowners insurance. There can also be no
assurance that the Company will be able to obtain the required regulatory approvals to offer
additional insurance products. UPCIC is also required to maintain minimum surplus to support its
underwriting program. The surplus requirement affects UPCICs potential growth. In addition,
there can be no assurance that current state or federal laws applicable to the Companys business
will
6
not be amended in the future. Any such amendment could have an adverse effect on the Companys
financial condition or operations.
Insurance Operations
Management has implemented several rate increases over the past several years to strengthen
UPCICs financial condition. The positive impact of these rate increases has been partially offset
by rate decreases and discounts mandated by the Florida Legislature, including wind mitigation
credits which became effective in 2007. Recent rate increases include two premium rate changes
filed by UPCIC for HO and DP with the Florida OIR in the calendar year 2009, which were both
approved. The first requested statewide average rate increase of 4.8% HO was approved by the OIR
and was implemented in UPCICs rates on February 27, 2009 for new business and April 19, 2009 for
renewal business. The first requested statewide average rate increase of 4.7% DP was approved by
the OIR and was implemented in UPCICs rates on March 2, 2009 for new business and April 21, 2009
for renewal business. The second requested statewide average rate increase of 14.6% HO was
approved by the OIR and was implemented in UPCICs rates on October 22, 2009 for new business and
December 11, 2009 for renewal business. The second requested statewide average rate increase of
14.8% DP was approved by OIR and was implemented in UPCICs rates on November 5, 2009 for new
business and December 29, 2009 for renewal business. Finally, UPCIC filed a premium rate change for
HO with the Florida OIR on November 5, 2010. The statewide average rate increase of 14.9% HO was
approved by the OIR on February 3, 2011 and was implemented in UPCICs rates on February 7, 2011
for new business and March 28, 2011 for renewal business.
The insurance premiums charged by UPCIC are subject to various statutory and regulatory
requirements. Among these, UPCIC must offer wind mitigation discounts in accordance with a program
mandated by the Florida Legislature and implemented by the OIR. The level of wind mitigation
discounts mandated by the Florida Legislature to be effective June 1, 2007 for new business and
August 1, 2007 for renewal business have had a significant negative effect on UPCICs premium. The
following table reflects the effect of wind mitigation credits received by UPCIC policyholders:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction of in-force premium (only policies including wind coverage) |
|
|
|
Percentage of UPCIC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage |
|
|
|
policyholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
reduction of |
|
Date |
|
receiving credits |
|
|
Total credits |
|
|
In-force premium |
|
|
in-force premium |
|
6/1/2007 |
|
|
1.9 |
% |
|
$ |
6,284,697 |
|
|
$ |
487,866,319 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
12/31/2007 |
|
|
11.8 |
% |
|
$ |
31,951,623 |
|
|
$ |
500,136,287 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
% |
3/31/2008 |
|
|
16.9 |
% |
|
$ |
52,398,215 |
|
|
$ |
501,523,343 |
|
|
|
9.5 |
% |
6/30/2008 |
|
|
21.3 |
% |
|
$ |
74,185,924 |
|
|
$ |
508,411,721 |
|
|
|
12.7 |
% |
9/30/2008 |
|
|
27.3 |
% |
|
$ |
97,802,322 |
|
|
$ |
515,560,249 |
|
|
|
16.0 |
% |
12/31/2008 |
|
|
31.1 |
% |
|
$ |
123,524,911 |
|
|
$ |
514,011,138 |
|
|
|
19.4 |
% |
3/31/2009 |
|
|
36.3 |
% |
|
$ |
158,229,542 |
|
|
$ |
530,029,572 |
|
|
|
23.0 |
% |
6/30/2009 |
|
|
40.4 |
% |
|
$ |
188,053,342 |
|
|
$ |
544,646,437 |
|
|
|
25.7 |
% |
9/30/2009 |
|
|
43.0 |
% |
|
$ |
210,291,783 |
|
|
$ |
554,378,761 |
|
|
|
27.5 |
% |
12/31/2009 |
|
|
45.2 |
% |
|
$ |
219,974,130 |
|
|
$ |
556,577,449 |
|
|
|
28.3 |
% |
3/31/2010 |
|
|
47.8 |
% |
|
$ |
235,717,892 |
|
|
$ |
569,870,173 |
|
|
|
29.3 |
% |
6/30/2010 |
|
|
50.9 |
% |
|
$ |
281,386,124 |
|
|
$ |
620,276,858 |
|
|
|
31.2 |
% |
9/30/2010 |
|
|
52.4 |
% |
|
$ |
291,306,407 |
|
|
$ |
634,285,246 |
|
|
|
31.5 |
% |
12/31/2010 |
|
|
54.2 |
% |
|
$ |
309,858,168 |
|
|
$ |
648,408,227 |
|
|
|
32.3 |
% |
Insurers like UPCIC fully experience the impact of rate or discount changes more than 12
months after they are implemented because their policies renew throughout the year. Although
insurers may seek to rectify any problems through subsequent rate increase filings with the OIR,
there is no assurance that the OIR and the insurers will agree on the amount of rate change that is
needed. In addition, any adjustments to the insurers rates similarly take more than 12 months to
be fully integrated into the insurers business.
Management of Exposure to Catastrophic Losses
UPCIC is exposed to potentially numerous insured losses arising out of single or multiple
occurrences, such as natural catastrophes. As with all property and casualty insurers, UPCIC
expects to and will incur some losses related to catastrophes and attempts to price its policies
accordingly. However, there is no assurance UPCIC will be able to charge prices commensurate with
the potential losses that may result from catastrophic events.
7
UPCICs exposure to catastrophic losses arises principally out of hurricanes and windstorms. Through the use of standard industry
modeling techniques that are susceptible to change, UPCIC manages its exposure to such losses on an
ongoing basis from an underwriting perspective. UPCIC also continues to actively explore and
analyze credible scientific evidence, including the potential impact of global climate change, that
may affect the ability to manage exposure under its policies as well as the potential impact of
laws and regulations intended to combat climate change.
UPCIC protects itself against the risk of catastrophic loss by obtaining annual reinsurance
coverage as of the beginning of hurricane season on June 1 of each year. UPCICs reinsurance
program consists of excess of loss, quota share and catastrophe reinsurance for multiple
hurricanes. UPCICs catastrophe reinsurance program currently covers three events subject to the
terms and limitations of the reinsurance contracts. However, UPCIC may not buy enough reinsurance
to cover multiple storms going forward or be able to timely or cost-effectively obtain reinsurance.
UPCIC is responsible for losses related to catastrophic events with incurred losses in excess of
coverage provided by UPCICs reinsurance program and for losses that otherwise are not covered by
the reinsurance program, which could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the Companys
business, financial condition and results of operations.
For the 2010, 2009 and 2008 hurricane seasons, UPCIC purchased reinsurance coverage up to and
above the 100-year Probable Maximum Loss (PML). PML is a general concept applied in the
insurance industry for defining high loss scenarios that should be considered when underwriting
insurance risk. Catastrophe models such as AIR/CLASIC/2, produce loss estimates that are qualified
in terms of dollars and probabilities. UPCICs PML amounts are modeled using the AIR/CLASIC/2
version in effect at the date of the calculation. Probability of exceedance or the probability
that the actual loss level will exceed a particular threshold is a standard catastrophe model
output. For example, the 100-year PML represents a 1.00% Annual Probability of Exceedance. It is
estimated that the 100-year PML is likely to be equaled or exceeded in one year out of 100 on
average, or 1 percent of the time. It is the 99th percentile of the annual loss distribution.
Although UPCIC uses a widely recognized, commercially available model to estimate its
hurricane losses, other models exist that might produce higher or lower loss estimates. The loss
estimates developed by the catastrophe model are dependent upon assumptions or scenarios
incorporated into the model by its developer, which is a third party independent of UPCIC, and on
assumptions or scenarios made by UPCIC or its representatives when using the model. There is no
assurance these assumptions or scenarios will reflect the characteristics of future hurricane
events that may affect Florida or the resulting economic conditions. As UPCIC writes policies
throughout the year, its 100-year PML will change. It is possible that the reinsurance in place may
not always surpass the 100-year PML at every point in time. This may result in exposure to UPCIC
for losses that are not covered by the reinsurance program, which could have a material adverse
effect on UPCICs and the Companys business, financial condition, results of operations and
liquidity.
Reliance on Third Parties and Reinsurers
UPCIC relies on reinsurers to limit the amount of risk retained under its policies and to
increase its ability to write additional risks. UPCICs intention is to limit its exposure and
therefore protect its capital, even in the event of catastrophic occurrences, through reinsurance
agreements. There is no assurance UPCIC will be able to obtain
current levels of reinsurance in the future, which could potentially result in a material
adverse effect to the Company should a catastrophic event occur.
Reinsurance
The property and casualty reinsurance industry is subject to the same market conditions as the
property and casualty insurance market as a whole, and there can be no assurance that reinsurance
will be available to UPCIC to the same extent and at the same cost as currently in place for UPCIC.
Future increases in catastrophe reinsurance costs are possible and could adversely affect UPCICs
results. Reinsurance does not legally discharge an insurer from its primary liability for the full
amount of the risks it insures, although it does make the reinsurer liable to the primary insurer.
Therefore, UPCIC is subject to credit risk with respect to its reinsurers. In addition, UPCIC
obtains a significant portion of its reinsurance coverage from the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe
Fund (FHCF). There is no guaranty the FHCF will be able to provide reimbursements at levels or
with the speed requested and relied upon by UPCIC or as timely as required by UPCICs claims
payments to policyholders. Likewise, there is no guaranty that laws, contracts or requirements
relating to the FHCF will be interpreted in a manner consistent with UPCICs understandings or will
remain unchanged in the future.
8
On October 29, 2010, the State Board of Administration (SBA) published its most recent
estimate of the FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity in the Florida Administrative Weekly. The SBA
estimated that the FHCFs total claims-paying capacity under current market conditions for the 2010
- 2011 contract year is projected to be $18.776 billion over the 12-month period following the
estimate. The SBA also referred to its report entitled, October 2010 Estimated Claims Paying
Capacity Report (Report) as providing greater detail regarding the FHCFs claims-paying
capacity. The Report estimated that the FHCFs minimum 12-month claims-paying capacity is $19.414
billion and its maximum 12-month claims-paying capacity is $35.414 billion with an average
claims-paying capacity of $25.414 billion. This projected claims-paying capacity exceeds the
FHCFs maximum statutory obligation for 2010 of $18.776 billion. Claims-paying capacity exceeding
the FHCFs maximum statutory obligation for a single contract year may be available for insurer
reimbursements in future contract years. UPCIC elected to purchase the FHCF Mandatory Layer of
Coverage for the 2010 2011 contract year, which corresponds to FHCF loss reimbursement capacity
of $17 billion. In the event the aggregate amount of reimbursement coverage requested by insurers
for a particular contract year exceeds the FHCFs actual claims-paying capacity, the FHCFs
obligation to reimburse insurers is limited by law to its actual claims-paying capacity. The
aggregate cost of UPCICs reinsurance program may increase should UPCIC deem it necessary to
purchase additional private market reinsurance due to reduced estimates of the FHCFs loss
reimbursement capacity.
Management evaluates the financial condition of its reinsurers and monitors concentrations of
credit risk arising from similar geographic regions, activities or economic characteristics of the
reinsurers to minimize its exposure to significant losses from reinsurer insolvencies. A
reinsurers insolvency or inability to make payments under a reinsurance treaty could have a
material adverse effect on the financial condition and profitability of UPCIC and the Company.
While ceding premiums to reinsurers reduces UPCICs risk of exposure in the event of catastrophic
losses, it also reduces UPCICs potential for greater profits should such catastrophic events fail
to occur. The Company believes that the extent of UPCICs reinsurance is typical of a company of
its size in the homeowners insurance industry.
Adequacy of Liabilities for Losses
The liabilities for losses and loss adjustment expenses (LAE) periodically established by
UPCIC are estimates of amounts needed to pay reported and unreported claims and related loss
adjustment expenses. The estimates necessarily will be based on certain assumptions related to the
ultimate cost to settle such claims. There is an inherent degree of uncertainty involved in the
establishment of liabilities for losses and loss adjustment expenses and there may be substantial
differences between actual losses and UPCICs liabilities estimates. The inherent degree of
uncertainty involved in the establishment of liabilities for losses and loss adjustment expenses
can be more pronounced during periods of rapid growth in written premiums such as UPCIC has
experienced during recent years. UPCIC relies on industry data, as well as the expertise and
experience of independent actuaries in an effort to establish accurate estimates and adequate
liabilities. Furthermore, factors such as storms and weather conditions, climate changes and
patterns, inflation, claim settlement patterns, legislative activity and litigation trends may have
an impact on UPCICs future loss experience. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that UPCICs
liabilities will be adequate to cover ultimate loss development. The profitability and financial
condition of UPCIC and the Company could be adversely affected to the extent that its liabilities
are inadequate.
UPCIC is directly liable for loss and LAE payments under the terms of the insurance policies
that it writes. In many cases, several years may elapse between the occurrence of an insured loss
and UPCICs payment of that loss. As required by insurance regulations and accounting rules, UPCIC reflects its liability
for the ultimate payment of all incurred losses and LAE by establishing a liability for those
unpaid losses and LAE for both reported and unreported claims, which represent estimates of future
amounts needed to pay claims and related expenses.
When a claim involving a probable loss is reported, UPCIC establishes a liability for the
estimated amount of UPCICs ultimate loss and LAE payments. The estimate of the amount of the
ultimate loss is based upon such factors as the type of loss, jurisdiction of the occurrence,
knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the claim, severity of injury or damage, potential for
ultimate exposure, estimate of liability on the part of the insured, past experience with similar
claims and the applicable policy provisions. All newly reported claims received are set up with an
initial average liability. That claim is then evaluated and the liability is adjusted upward or
downward according to the facts and damages of that particular claim. In addition, management
provides for a liability on an aggregate basis to provide for losses incurred but not reported
(IBNR). UPCIC utilizes independent actuaries to help establish its liability for unpaid losses
and LAE. UPCIC does not discount the liability for unpaid losses and LAE for financial statement
purposes.
The estimates of the liability for unpaid losses and LAE are subject to the effect of trends
in claims severity and frequency and are continually reviewed. As part of this process, UPCIC
reviews historical data and considers
9
various factors, including known and anticipated legal developments, changes in social attitudes, inflation and economic conditions. As experience
develops and other data become available, these estimates are revised, as required, resulting in
increases or decreases to the existing liability for unpaid losses and LAE. Adjustments are
reflected in results of operations in the period in which they are made and the liabilities may
deviate substantially from prior estimates.
Liability claims historically tend to have longer time lapses between the occurrence of the
event, the reporting of the claim to UPCIC and the final settlement than do property claims.
Liability claims often involve third parties filing suit and the ensuing litigation. By comparison,
property damage claims tend to be reported in a relatively shorter period of time with the vast
majority of these claims resulting in an adjustment without litigation.
There can be no assurance that UPCICs liability for unpaid losses and LAE will be adequate to
cover actual losses. If UPCICs liability for unpaid losses and LAE proves to be inadequate, UPCIC
will be required to increase the liability with a corresponding reduction in UPCICs net income in
the period in which the deficiency is identified. Future loss experience substantially in excess of
established liability for unpaid losses and LAE could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and
the Companys business, results of operations and financial condition.
The following table sets forth a reconciliation of beginning and ending liability for unpaid losses
and LAE as shown in the Companys consolidated financial statements for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Balance at beginning of year |
|
$ |
127,197,753 |
|
|
$ |
87,947,774 |
|
Less reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
(62,900,913 |
) |
|
|
(43,384,469 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance at beginning of year |
|
|
64,296,840 |
|
|
|
44,563,305 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incurred related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current year |
|
|
107,424,191 |
|
|
|
97,630,002 |
|
Prior years |
|
|
5,931,284 |
|
|
|
8,503,133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total incurred |
|
|
113,355,475 |
|
|
|
106,133,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current year |
|
|
54,216,243 |
|
|
|
52,388,374 |
|
Prior years |
|
|
43,621,652 |
|
|
|
34,011,226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total paid |
|
|
97,837,896 |
|
|
|
86,399,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance at end of year |
|
|
79,814,419 |
|
|
|
64,296,840 |
|
Plus reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
79,114,418 |
|
|
|
62,900,913 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year |
|
$ |
158,928,837 |
|
|
$ |
127,197,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a result of changes in estimates of insured events in prior years, the provision for losses
and LAE, net of related reinsurance recoverables, increased by $5,931,284 and $8,503,133 in 2010
and 2009, respectively, principally as a result of actual loss development on prior year
non-catastrophe losses during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.
The Company has created a proprietary claims analysis tool (P2P) to analyze and calculate
reserves. P2P is a custom built application by UPCIC that aggregates, analyzes and forecasts
reserves based on historical data that spans more than a decade. It identifies historical claims
data using same like kind and quality variables that exist in present claims and sets forth
appropriate, more accurate reserves on current claims. P2P is reviewed by UPCIC management on a
weekly basis in reviewing the topography of existing and incoming claims. P2P will be analyzed at
each quarters end and adjustments to reserves are made at an aggregate level when appropriate.
10
P2P was initially used for 2010 third quarter reserve analysis resulting in an increase in
2010 loss year reserves. Further refinements were put into place in 2010 fourth quarter which
included inflation adjustments for past claims into 2010 dollars (inflation guard). P2P was
reviewed by an independent third party for data integrity and system reliability. The program was
used for 2010 fourth quarter analysis and supported the companys independent actuarys best
figures for development in prior years. The system indicated reserves for the 2010 loss year that
exceeded actuarys best figures and system figures were used at year end. This program will be used
for quarterly reviews on an ongoing basis.
Based upon consultations with the Companys independent actuarial consultants and their
statement of opinion on losses and LAE, the Company believes that the liability for unpaid losses
and LAE is currently adequate to cover all claims and related expenses which may arise from
incidents reported and IBNR.
The following table presents total unpaid loss and LAE, net of related reinsurance
recoverables. The corresponding reinsurance recoverables shown in the Companys consolidated
financial statements for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Unpaid Loss and LAE, net |
|
$ |
23,385,670 |
|
|
$ |
15,164,583 |
|
IBNR loss and LAE, net |
|
|
56,428,749 |
|
|
|
49,132,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total unpaid loss and LAE, net |
|
$ |
79,814,419 |
|
|
$ |
64,296,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance recoverable on unpaid loss and LAE |
|
|
22,973,458 |
|
|
|
15,810,646 |
|
Reinsurance recoverable on IBNR loss and LAE |
|
|
56,140,960 |
|
|
|
47,090,267 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total reinsurance recoverable on unpaid loss
and LAE |
|
$ |
79,114,418 |
|
|
$ |
62,900,913 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following Liability for Unpaid Losses and LAE re-estimates table illustrates the change
over time of the direct reserves established for unpaid losses and LAE for UPCIC at the end of the
last eleven calendar years. The first section shows the reserves as originally reported at the end
of the stated year. The second section, reading down, shows the cumulative amounts paid as of the
end of successive years with respect to that reserve liability. The third section, reading down,
shows retroactive re-estimates of the original recorded reserve as of the end of each successive
year which is the result of UPCICs expanded awareness of additional facts and circumstances that
pertain to the unsettled claims. The last section compares the latest re-estimated reserve to the
reserve originally established, and indicates whether the original reserve was adequate to cover
the estimated costs of unsettled claims. The table also presents the gross re-estimated liability
as of the end of the latest re-estimation period, with separate disclosure of the related
re-estimated reinsurance recoverable. The Liability for Unpaid Losses and LAE re-estimates table is
cumulative and, therefore, ending balances should not be added since the amount at the end of each
calendar year includes activity for both the current and prior years. Unfavorable reserve
re-estimates are shown in this table in parentheses. Amounts in the table are shown in thousands.
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
2000 |
|
Balance Sheet Liability |
|
|
158,929 |
|
|
|
127,198 |
|
|
|
87,948 |
|
|
|
68,806 |
|
|
|
49,454 |
|
|
|
66,866 |
|
|
|
57,823 |
|
|
|
7,521 |
|
|
|
6,962 |
|
|
|
5,795 |
|
|
|
2,516 |
|
Cumulative paid as of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One year later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
88,364 |
|
|
|
70,066 |
|
|
|
52,666 |
|
|
|
42,546 |
|
|
|
79,374 |
|
|
|
66,213 |
|
|
|
4,195 |
|
|
|
4,113 |
|
|
|
7,311 |
|
|
|
3,073 |
|
Two years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91,264 |
|
|
|
71,207 |
|
|
|
54,815 |
|
|
|
103,362 |
|
|
|
81,025 |
|
|
|
5,470 |
|
|
|
5,156 |
|
|
|
7,263 |
|
|
|
3,720 |
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78,321 |
|
|
|
64,781 |
|
|
|
111,799 |
|
|
|
92,616 |
|
|
|
6,074 |
|
|
|
5,447 |
|
|
|
7,798 |
|
|
|
3,773 |
|
Four years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,262 |
|
|
|
118,509 |
|
|
|
95,087 |
|
|
|
6,883 |
|
|
|
5,731 |
|
|
|
7,991 |
|
|
|
4,066 |
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122,575 |
|
|
|
97,757 |
|
|
|
7,176 |
|
|
|
5,860 |
|
|
|
8,139 |
|
|
|
4,099 |
|
Six years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
99,219 |
|
|
|
7,356 |
|
|
|
5,897 |
|
|
|
8,152 |
|
|
|
4,112 |
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,384 |
|
|
|
6,015 |
|
|
|
8,180 |
|
|
|
4,167 |
|
Eight years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,017 |
|
|
|
8,188 |
|
|
|
4,194 |
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,189 |
|
|
|
4,200 |
|
Ten years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Liability |
|
|
158,929 |
|
|
|
127,198 |
|
|
|
87,948 |
|
|
|
68,806 |
|
|
|
49,454 |
|
|
|
66,866 |
|
|
|
57,823 |
|
|
|
7,521 |
|
|
|
6,962 |
|
|
|
5,795 |
|
|
|
2,516 |
|
|
One year later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
142,999 |
|
|
|
107,656 |
|
|
|
80,123 |
|
|
|
68,075 |
|
|
|
118,656 |
|
|
|
73,897 |
|
|
|
6,674 |
|
|
|
5,762 |
|
|
|
8,294 |
|
|
|
4,005 |
|
Two years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115,486 |
|
|
|
87,289 |
|
|
|
69,623 |
|
|
|
125,112 |
|
|
|
95,165 |
|
|
|
5,907 |
|
|
|
6,154 |
|
|
|
7,797 |
|
|
|
4,167 |
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90,868 |
|
|
|
73,612 |
|
|
|
124,092 |
|
|
|
101,182 |
|
|
|
6,536 |
|
|
|
5,585 |
|
|
|
8,319 |
|
|
|
4,158 |
|
Four years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,767 |
|
|
|
125,249 |
|
|
|
100,823 |
|
|
|
7,149 |
|
|
|
5,856 |
|
|
|
8,056 |
|
|
|
4,328 |
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129,914 |
|
|
|
101,435 |
|
|
|
7,394 |
|
|
|
5,993 |
|
|
|
8,158 |
|
|
|
4,110 |
|
Six years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101,242 |
|
|
|
7,530 |
|
|
|
6,012 |
|
|
|
8,241 |
|
|
|
4,112 |
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,436 |
|
|
|
6,067 |
|
|
|
8,244 |
|
|
|
4,207 |
|
Eight years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,019 |
|
|
|
8,230 |
|
|
|
4,209 |
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,189 |
|
|
|
4,203 |
|
Ten years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative redundancy
(deficiency) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,801 |
) |
|
|
(27,538 |
) |
|
|
(22,062 |
) |
|
|
(28,313 |
) |
|
|
(63,048 |
) |
|
|
(43,419 |
) |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
943 |
|
|
|
(2,394 |
) |
|
|
(1,684 |
) |
The following Liability for Unpaid Losses and LAE re-estimates table illustrates the change
over time of the reserves, net of reinsurance, established for unpaid losses and LAE for UPCIC at
the end of the last eleven calendar years.
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
2000 |
|
Gross Reserves for Unpaid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Claims and Claims Expense |
|
|
158,929 |
|
|
|
127,198 |
|
|
|
87,948 |
|
|
|
68,806 |
|
|
|
49,454 |
|
|
|
66,866 |
|
|
|
57,823 |
|
|
|
7,521 |
|
|
|
6,962 |
|
|
|
5,795 |
|
|
|
2,516 |
|
Reinsurance Recoverable |
|
|
79,114 |
|
|
|
62,901 |
|
|
|
43,385 |
|
|
|
37,583 |
|
|
|
32,314 |
|
|
|
60,792 |
|
|
|
56,266 |
|
|
|
6,249 |
|
|
|
5,502 |
|
|
|
3,091 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Liability |
|
|
79,814 |
|
|
|
64,297 |
|
|
|
44,563 |
|
|
|
31,223 |
|
|
|
17,140 |
|
|
|
6,074 |
|
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
1,460 |
|
|
|
2,704 |
|
|
|
925 |
|
Cumulative paid as of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One year later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,860 |
|
|
|
34,171 |
|
|
|
23,709 |
|
|
|
20,023 |
|
|
|
12,886 |
|
|
|
1,210 |
|
|
|
935 |
|
|
|
631 |
|
|
|
3,586 |
|
|
|
1,124 |
|
Two years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
44,015 |
|
|
|
31,751 |
|
|
|
23,362 |
|
|
|
23,795 |
|
|
|
11,497 |
|
|
|
1,132 |
|
|
|
941 |
|
|
|
3,557 |
|
|
|
1,377 |
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,472 |
|
|
|
26,956 |
|
|
|
25,469 |
|
|
|
21,732 |
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
3,774 |
|
|
|
1,399 |
|
Four years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,585 |
|
|
|
27,993 |
|
|
|
23,118 |
|
|
|
1,407 |
|
|
|
1,192 |
|
|
|
3,867 |
|
|
|
1,502 |
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29,450 |
|
|
|
25,446 |
|
|
|
1,444 |
|
|
|
1,232 |
|
|
|
3,940 |
|
|
|
1,518 |
|
Six years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,721 |
|
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
|
1,244 |
|
|
|
3,937 |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,479 |
|
|
|
1,269 |
|
|
|
3,948 |
|
|
|
1,542 |
|
Eight years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
3,951 |
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,952 |
|
|
|
1,554 |
|
Ten years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Liability |
|
|
79,814 |
|
|
|
64,297 |
|
|
|
44,563 |
|
|
|
31,223 |
|
|
|
17,140 |
|
|
|
6,074 |
|
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
|
1,272 |
|
|
|
1,460 |
|
|
|
2,704 |
|
|
|
925 |
|
|
One year later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,468 |
|
|
|
53,226 |
|
|
|
37,573 |
|
|
|
29,167 |
|
|
|
25,246 |
|
|
|
4,056 |
|
|
|
1,442 |
|
|
|
1,134 |
|
|
|
4,032 |
|
|
|
1,425 |
|
Two years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,005 |
|
|
|
39,948 |
|
|
|
30,501 |
|
|
|
30,943 |
|
|
|
22,644 |
|
|
|
1,209 |
|
|
|
1,295 |
|
|
|
3,785 |
|
|
|
1,555 |
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,441 |
|
|
|
31,285 |
|
|
|
31,178 |
|
|
|
28,169 |
|
|
|
1,395 |
|
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
|
4,010 |
|
|
|
1,553 |
|
Four years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,303 |
|
|
|
31,482 |
|
|
|
28,524 |
|
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
1,254 |
|
|
|
3,898 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,645 |
|
|
|
28,594 |
|
|
|
1,509 |
|
|
|
1,293 |
|
|
|
3,950 |
|
|
|
1,522 |
|
Six years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,568 |
|
|
|
1,510 |
|
|
|
1,298 |
|
|
|
3,976 |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,530 |
|
|
|
1,292 |
|
|
|
3,978 |
|
|
|
1,556 |
|
Eight years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,271 |
|
|
|
3,971 |
|
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,952 |
|
|
|
1,555 |
|
Ten years later |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,554 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative
redundancy (deficiency) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,171 |
) |
|
|
(10,442 |
) |
|
|
(8,218 |
) |
|
|
(14,163 |
) |
|
|
(25,571 |
) |
|
|
(27,011 |
) |
|
|
(258 |
) |
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
(1,248 |
) |
|
|
(629 |
) |
Percent |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-9.6 |
% |
|
|
-23.4 |
% |
|
|
-26.3 |
% |
|
|
-82.6 |
% |
|
|
-421.0 |
% |
|
|
-1734.8 |
% |
|
|
-20.3 |
% |
|
|
12.9 |
% |
|
|
-46.2 |
% |
|
|
-68.0 |
% |
Gross
Reestimated Liability-Latest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
142,999 |
|
|
|
115,486 |
|
|
|
90,868 |
|
|
|
77,767 |
|
|
|
129,914 |
|
|
|
101,242 |
|
|
|
7,436 |
|
|
|
6,019 |
|
|
|
8,189 |
|
|
|
4,200 |
|
Reestimated Recovery-Latest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,531 |
|
|
|
60,481 |
|
|
|
51,427 |
|
|
|
46,464 |
|
|
|
98,269 |
|
|
|
72,674 |
|
|
|
5,906 |
|
|
|
4,748 |
|
|
|
4,237 |
|
|
|
2,646 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Reestimated Liability-Latest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,468 |
|
|
|
55,005 |
|
|
|
39,441 |
|
|
|
31,303 |
|
|
|
31,645 |
|
|
|
28,568 |
|
|
|
1,530 |
|
|
|
1,271 |
|
|
|
3,952 |
|
|
|
1,554 |
|
Gross cumulative redundancy
(deficiency) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,801 |
) |
|
|
(27,538 |
) |
|
|
(22,062 |
) |
|
|
(28,313 |
) |
|
|
(63,048 |
) |
|
|
(43,419 |
) |
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
943 |
|
|
|
(2,394 |
) |
|
|
(1,684 |
) |
The cumulative redundancy or deficiency represents the aggregate change in the estimates over
all prior years. A deficiency indicates that the latest estimate of the liability for losses and
LAE is higher than the liability that was originally estimated and a redundancy indicates that such
estimate is lower. It should be emphasized that the table presents a run-off of balance sheet
liability for the periods indicated rather than accident or policy loss development for those
periods. Therefore, each amount in the table includes the cumulative effects of changes in
liability for all prior periods. Conditions and trends that have affected liabilities in the
past may not necessarily occur in the future.
Underwriting results of insurance companies are frequently measured by their combined ratios
which is the sum of the loss and expense ratios described in the following paragraph. However,
investment income, federal income taxes and other non-underwriting income or expense are not
reflected in the combined ratio. The profitability of property and casualty insurance companies
depends on income from underwriting, investment and service operations. Underwriting results are
considered profitable when the combined ratio is under 100% and unprofitable when the combined
ratio is over 100%.
The following table sets forth the statutory loss ratios, expense ratios and combined ratios
for the periods indicated for UPCIC. The ratios are net of reinsurance, including catastrophe
reinsurance premiums which comprise a significant cost, and inclusive of loss adjustment expenses.
The ratios shown in the table below are computed based upon statutory accounting principles. The
expense ratio includes management fees and commissions paid by UPCIC to an affiliate in the amount
of $52,689,347 in 2010 and $46,437,196 in 2009.
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Loss Ratio |
|
|
73 |
% |
|
|
83 |
% |
Expense Ratio |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
56 |
% |
Combined Ratio |
|
|
113 |
% |
|
|
139 |
% |
In order to reduce losses and thereby reduce the loss ratio and the combined ratio, the
Company has taken several steps. These steps include closely monitoring rate levels for new and
renewal business, restructuring the homeowners insurance coverage offered, reducing the cost of
catastrophic reinsurance coverage, and working to reduce general and administrative expenses.
Government Regulation
Florida insurance companies, such as UPCIC, are subject to regulation and supervision by the
OIR. The OIR has broad regulatory, supervisory and administrative powers. Such powers relate,
among other things, to the granting and revocation of licenses to transact business; the licensing
of agents (through the Florida Department of Financial Services); the standards of solvency to be
met and maintained; the nature of, and limitations on, investments; approval of policy forms and
rates; review of reinsurance contracts; periodic examination of the affairs of insurance companies;
and the form and content of required financial statements. Such regulation and supervision are
primarily for the benefit and protection of policyholders and not for the benefit of investors.
In addition, the Florida Legislature and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) from time to time consider proposals that may affect, among other things, regulatory
assessments and reserve requirements. The Company cannot predict the effect that any proposed or
future legislation or regulatory or administrative initiatives may have on the financial condition
or operations of UPCIC or the Company. Actions by the OIR could have a material adverse effect on
the Company.
UPCIC has become and will become subject to other states laws and regulations as it has
obtained and continues to seek authority to transact business in states other than Florida. In
addition, UPCICs possible participation in the NFIPs Write Your Own (WYO) Program of the NFIP
will be governed by federal laws and regulations.
Legislative Initiatives
The State of Florida operates the Citizens Property Insurance Corporation (Citizens) to
provide insurance to Florida homeowners in high-risk areas and to others without private insurance
options. As of February 28, 2011, there were 1,308,857 Citizens policies in force. In May 2007,
the State of Florida passed legislation that froze property insurance rates for Citizens customers
at December 2006 levels through December 31, 2008, and permits insurance customers to opt into
Citizens when the price of a privately-offered insurance policy is 15% more than the Citizens rate,
compared to the previous opt-in threshold of 25%. These initiatives, together with any future
initiatives that seek to further relax eligibility requirements or reduce premium rates for
Citizens customers, could adversely affect the ability of UPCIC and the Company to do business
profitably. In addition, the Florida Legislature in 2007 expanded the capacity of the FHCF, with
the intent of reducing the cost of reinsurance otherwise purchased by residential property
insurers. State and federal legislation relating to insurance is affected by a number of political
and economic factors that are beyond the control of UPCIC and the Company. The Florida Legislature
and the NAIC from time to time consider proposals that may affect, among other things, regulatory
assessments and reserve requirements. The Company cannot predict the effect that any proposed or
future federal or state legislation or initiatives may have on the financial condition or
operations of the Company or the Companys ability to expand its business.
Product Pricing
The rates charged by UPCIC generally are subject to regulatory review and approval before they may
be implemented. UPCIC periodically submits its rate revisions to regulators as required by law or
deemed by the Company and UPCIC to be necessary or appropriate for UPCICs business. UPCIC
prepares these filings based on objective data relating to its business and on judgment exercised
by its management and by retained professionals.
14
There is no assurance that the objective data
incorporated in UPCICs filings based on its past experience will be reflective of UPCICs future
business. In addition, there is no assurance that UPCICs business will develop consistently with
the judgments reflected in its filings. The Company and UPCIC likewise cannot be assured that
regulatory authorities will evaluate UPCICs data and judgments in the same manner as UPCIC.
UPCICs filings also may be affected by political or regulatory factors outside of UPCICs control,
which may result in disapproval of UPCICs filings or in negotiated compromises resulting in
approved rates that differ from rates initially filed by UPCIC or that the Company and UPCIC
otherwise would consider more appropriate for the Companys business.
The premiums charged by UPCIC to policyholders are affected by legislative enactments and
administrative rules, including a state-mandated program requiring residential property insurance
companies like UPCIC to provide premium discounts when policyholders verify that insured properties
have certain construction features or other windstorm loss reduction features. The level of
required premium discounts may exceed the expected reduction in losses associated with the
construction features for which the discounts are provided. Although UPCIC may submit rate filings
to address any premium deficiencies, those rate filings are subject to the considerations
identified in the preceding paragraph. Any inability of UPCIC to implement sufficient and timely
rate adjustments to provide aggregate premiums commensurate with UPCICs expected losses will have
a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the Companys business, financial condition, results of
operations and liquidity.
Dependence on Key Individuals
UPCICs operations depend in large part on the efforts of Bradley I. Meier, who serves as
President of UPCIC. Mr. Meier has also served as President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
of the Company since its inception in November 1990. In addition, UPCICs operations have become
materially dependent on the efforts of Sean P. Downes, who serves as Chief Operating Officer of
UPCIC. Mr. Downes has also served as Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President and Director of
the Company since January 2005 and as a Director of UPCIC since May 2003. The loss of the services
provided by either Mr. Meier or Mr. Downes could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the
Companys financial condition and results of operations.
Competition
The insurance industry is highly competitive and many companies currently write homeowners
property and casualty insurance. Additionally, the Company and its subsidiaries must compete with
companies that have greater capital resources and longer operating histories. Increased competition
from other private insurance companies as well as Citizens could adversely affect the Companys
ability to do business profitably. Although the Companys pricing is inevitably influenced to some
degree by that of its competitors, management of the Company believes that it is generally not in
the Companys best interest to compete solely on price, choosing instead to compete on the basis of
underwriting criteria, its distribution network and high quality service to its agents and
insureds. Increased competition could have a material adverse effect on the Company.
Financial Stability Rating
Financial stability ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position
of insurance companies and may impact an insurance companys sales. Demotech, Inc. maintains a
letter scale financial stability rating system ranging from Á (A double prime) to L (licensed by
state regulatory authorities). On March 30, 2011, Demotech, Inc. affirmed UPCICs financial
stability rating of A, which is the third highest of six rating levels. According to Demotech,
Inc., A ratings are assigned to insurers that have ... exceptional ability to maintain liquidity
of invested assets, quality reinsurance, acceptable financial leverage and realistic pricing while
simultaneously establishing loss and loss adjustment expense reserves at reasonable levels. With
a financial stability rating of A, the Company expects that UPCICs property insurance policies
will be acceptable to the secondary mortgage marketplace and mortgage lenders. The rating of UPCIC
is subject to at least annual review by, and may be revised downward or revoked at the sole
discretion of, Demotech, Inc.
In March 2010, to help address questions and concerns regarding Demotechs rating and review
process, Demotech published Guidance on Financial Stability Ratings and Catastrophe Reinsurance
Program Reporting for Florida Property Insurers. The document contains the criteria Demotech
considers when reviewing a company. On March 22, 2010, UPCIC received notice from Demotech that it
would require a capital infusion of $30 million by
April 16, 2010 in order for it to maintain its A rating. To comply with this requirement the
Company contributed an aggregate amount of $30 million to UPCIC in March 2010. Demotech
subsequently reaffirmed UPCICs A rating.
15
UPCICs failure to maintain a commercially acceptable financial stability rating could have a
material adverse effect on the Companys ability to retain and attract policyholders and agents.
Many of the Companys competitors have ratings higher than that of UPCIC. A downgrade in the
financial stability rating of UPCIC could have a material adverse impact on its ability to
effectively compete with other insurers with higher ratings. Additionally, a withdrawal of the
rating could cause UPCICs insurance policies to no longer be acceptable to the secondary
marketplace and mortgage lenders, which could cause a material adverse effect of the Companys
results of operations and financial position.
Demotech, Inc. bases its ratings on factors that concern policyholders and not upon factors
concerning investor protection. Such ratings are subject to change and are not recommendations to
buy, sell or hold securities.
Employees
As of February 24, 2011, the Company had 252 full-time employees. None of the Companys
employees are represented by a labor union. The Company has an employment agreement with Bradley I.
Meier, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, Sean P. Downes, Senior Vice President
and Chief Operating Officer of the Company and George R. De Heer, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company. See Executive Compensation-Employment Agreements. The Company also has employment
agreements with certain employees that do not serve in an executive capacity at the Company.
Available Information
Our internet address is http://www.universalinsuranceholdings.com. Our annual reports on Form
10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports
are available, free of charge, through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after their
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC maintains an internet site
that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding our filings
at www.sec.gov.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
This document contains forward-looking statements that anticipate results based on our
estimates, assumptions and plans that are subject to uncertainty. These statements are made subject
to the safe-harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We assume no
obligation to update any forward-looking statements as a result of new information or future events
or developments.
These forward-looking statements do not relate strictly to historical or current facts and may
be identified by their use of words like plans, seeks, expects, will, should,
anticipates, estimates, intends, believes, likely, targets and other words with similar
meanings. These statements may address, among other things, our strategy for growth, catastrophe
exposure management, product development, investment results, regulatory approvals, market
position, expenses, financial results, litigation and reserves. We believe that these statements
are based on reasonable estimates, assumptions and plans. However, if the estimates, assumptions or
plans underlying the forward-looking statements prove inaccurate or if other risks or uncertainties
arise, actual results could differ materially from those communicated in these forward-looking
statements.
In addition to the normal risks of business, we are subject to significant risks and
uncertainties, including those listed below, which apply to us as an insurer. These risks
constitute our cautionary statements under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and
readers should carefully review such cautionary statements as they identify certain important
factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking
statements and historical trends. These cautionary statements are not exclusive and are in addition
to other factors discussed elsewhere in this document, in our filings with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) or in materials incorporated therein by reference.
Risks Relating to the Property-Casualty business
As a property and casualty insurer, we may face significant losses from catastrophes and severe
weather events
Because of the exposure of our property and casualty business to catastrophic events, our
operating results and financial condition may vary significantly from one period to the next.
Catastrophes can be caused by various natural and man-made disasters, including wildfires,
tornadoes, hurricanes, tropical storms and certain types of
16
terrorism. We may incur catastrophe
losses in excess of those experienced in prior years, those that modeling estimate would be
incurred based on certain levels of probability, the average expected level used in pricing, and
our current reinsurance coverage limits. Despite our catastrophe management programs, we are
exposed to catastrophes that could have a material adverse effect on operating results and
financial condition. Our liquidity could be constrained by a catastrophe, or multiple catastrophes,
which result in extraordinary losses or a downgrade of our financial strength rating.
In addition, we are subject to claims arising from weather events such as rain, hail and high
winds. The incidence and severity of weather conditions are largely unpredictable. There is
generally an increase in the frequency and severity of property claims when severe weather
conditions occur. The nature and level of catastrophes in any period cannot be predicted and could
be material to our operations. In addition, impacts of catastrophes and our catastrophe management
strategy may adversely affect premium growth.
Unanticipated increases in the severity or frequency of claims may adversely affect our
profitability and financial condition
Changes in the severity or frequency of claims may affect the profitability of our Company.
Changes in homeowners claim severity are driven by inflation in the construction industry, in
building materials and in home furnishings and by other economic and environmental factors,
including increased demand for services and supplies in areas affected by catastrophes. However,
changes in the level of the severity of claims are not limited to the effects of inflation and
demand surge in these various sectors of the economy. Increases in claim severity can arise from
unexpected events that are inherently difficult to predict. Although we pursue various loss
management initiatives in order to mitigate future increases in claim severity, there can be no
assurances that these initiatives will successfully identify or reduce the effect of future
increases in claim severity.
Our Company may experience declines in claim frequency from time to time. The short-term level
of claim frequency we experience may vary from period to period and may not be sustainable over the
longer term. A significant long-term increase in claim frequency could have an adverse effect on
our operating results and financial condition.
Actual claims incurred may exceed current reserves established for claims and may adversely affect
our operating results and financial condition
Recorded claim reserves in the property-casualty business are based on our best estimates of
losses, both reported and incurred but not reported (IBNR), after considering known facts and
interpretations of circumstances. Internal factors are considered including our experience with
similar cases, actual claims paid, historical trends involving claim payment patterns, pending
levels of unpaid claims and contractual terms. External factors are also considered which include
but are not limited to law changes, court decisions, changes to regulatory requirements and
economic conditions. Because reserves are estimates of the unpaid portion of losses that have
occurred, including IBNR losses, the establishment of appropriate reserves, including reserves for
catastrophes, is an inherently uncertain and complex process. The ultimate cost of losses may vary
materially from recorded reserves and such variance may adversely affect our operating results and
financial condition.
Predicting claim expense relating to environmental liabilities is inherently uncertain and may have
a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition
The process of estimating environmental liabilities is complicated by complex legal issues
concerning, among other things, the interpretation of various insurance policy provisions and
whether those losses are, or were ever intended to be covered; and whether losses could be
recoverable through reinsurance. Litigation is a complex, lengthy proceeding that involves
substantial uncertainty for insurers. Actuarial techniques and databases used in estimating
environmental net loss reserves may prove to be inadequate indicators of the extent of probable
loss. Ultimate net losses from environmental liabilities could materially exceed established loss
reserves and expected recoveries and have a material adverse effect on our operating results and
financial condition.
The failure of the risk mitigation strategies we utilize could have a material adverse effect on
our financial condition or results of operations
We utilize a number of strategies to mitigate our risk exposure, such as:
17
|
|
|
engaging in rigorous underwriting; |
|
|
|
|
carefully evaluating terms and conditions of our policies; and |
|
|
|
|
ceding reinsurance. |
However, there are inherent limitations in all of these tactics and no assurance can be given
that an event or series of events will not result in loss levels in excess of our probable maximum
loss models, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of
operations. It is also possible that losses could manifest themselves in ways that we do not
anticipate and that our risk mitigation strategies are not designed to address. Such a
manifestation of losses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results
of operations.
These risks may be heightened during difficult economic conditions such as those currently
being experienced in the Florida and elsewhere.
Regulation limiting rate increases and requiring us to participate in loss sharing may decrease our
profitability
From time to time, political dispositions affect the insurance market, including efforts to
effectively suppress rates at a level that may not allow us to reach targeted levels of
profitability. Despite efforts to remove politics from insurance regulation, facts and history
demonstrate that public policymakers, when faced with untoward events and adverse public sentiment,
can act in ways that impede a satisfactory correlation between rates and risk. Such acts may affect
our ability to obtain approval for rate changes that may be required to attain rate adequacy along
with targeted levels of profitability and returns on equity. Our ability to afford reinsurance
required to reduce our catastrophe risk may be dependent upon the ability to adjust rates for its
cost.
Additionally, the Company is required to participate in guaranty funds for impaired or
insolvent insurance companies. The funds periodically assess losses against all insurance companies
doing business in the state. Our operating results and financial condition could be adversely
affected by any of these factors.
The potential benefits of implementing our profitability model may not be fully realized
We believe that our profitability model has allowed us to be more competitive and operate more
profitably. However, because many of our competitors have adopted underwriting criteria and
sophisticated models similar to those we use and because other competitors may follow suit, our
competitive advantage could decline or be lost. Competitive pressures could also force us to modify
our profitability model. Furthermore, we cannot be assured that the profitability model will
accurately reflect the level of losses that we will ultimately incur from the business generated.
UPCICs financial condition and operating results may be adversely affected by the cyclical nature
of the property and casualty business
The property and casualty market is cyclical and has experienced periods characterized by
relatively high levels of price competition, less restrictive underwriting standards and relatively
low premium rates, followed by periods of relatively lower levels of competition, more selective
underwriting standards and relatively high premium rates. A downturn in the profitability cycle of
the property and casualty business could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition
and results of operations.
Risks Relating to Investments
We may experience reduced returns or losses on our investments especially during periods of
heightened volatility, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or
financial condition.
The returns on our investment portfolio may be reduced or we may incur losses as a result of
changes in general economic conditions, interest rates, real estate markets, fixed income markets,
metals markets, energy
markets, agriculture markets, equity markets, alternative investment markets, credit markets,
exchange rates, global capital market conditions and numerous other factors that are beyond our
control.
18
The worldwide financial markets experience high levels of volatility during certain periods,
which could have an increasingly adverse impact on the U.S. and foreign economies. The financial
market volatility and the resulting negative economic impact could continue and it is possible that
it may be prolonged, which could adversely affect our current investment portfolio, make it
difficult to determine the value of certain assets in our portfolio and/or make it difficult for us
to purchase suitable investments that meet our risk and return criteria. These factors could cause
us to realize less than expected returns on invested assets, sell investments for a loss or write
off or write down investments, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations or financial condition.
We are subject to market risk which may adversely impact investment income
Our primary market risk exposure is to changes in interest rates. A decline in market interest
rates could have an adverse effect on our investment income as we invest cash in new investments
that may yield less than the portfolios average rate. A decline could also lead us to purchase
longer-term or riskier assets in order to obtain adequate investment yields resulting in a duration
gap when compared to the duration of liabilities. An increase in market interest rates could have
an adverse effect on the value of our investment portfolio by decreasing the fair values of the
fixed income securities that comprise a portion of our investment portfolio. A decline in the
quality of our investment portfolio as a result of adverse economic conditions or otherwise could
cause additional realized losses on securities.
Concentration of our investment portfolios in any particular segment of the economy may have
adverse effects on our operating results and financial condition
The concentration of our investment portfolios in any particular industry, collateral types,
group of related industries or geographic sector could have an adverse effect on our investment
portfolios and consequently on our results of operations and financial condition. Events or
developments that have a negative impact on any particular industry, group of related industries or
geographic region may have a greater adverse effect on the investment portfolios to the extent that
the portfolios are concentrated rather than diversified.
Risks Relating to the Insurance Industry
Our future results are dependent in part on our ability to successfully operate in an insurance
industry that is highly competitive
The insurance industry is highly competitive. Many of our competitors have well-established
national reputations and market similar products. Because of the competitive nature of the
insurance industry, including competition for producers such as independent agents, there can be no
assurance that we will continue to effectively compete with our industry rivals, or that
competitive pressures will not have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or
financial condition. Furthermore, certain competitors operate using a mutual insurance company
structure and therefore, may have dissimilar profitability and return targets. Our ability to
successfully operate may also be impaired if we are not effective in filling critical leadership
positions, in developing the talent and skills of our human resources, in assimilating new
executive talent into our organization, or in deploying human resource talent consistently with our
business goals.
Difficult conditions in the economy generally could adversely affect our business and operating
results
The United States economy has experienced widespread job losses, higher unemployment, lower
consumer spending, continued declines in home prices and substantial increases in delinquencies on
consumer debt, including defaults on home mortgages. Moreover, recent disruptions in the financial
markets, particularly the reduced availability of credit and tightened lending requirements, have
affected the ability of borrowers to refinance loans at more affordable rates. We cannot predict
the length and severity of a recession, but as with most businesses, we believe a longer or more
severe recession could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
A general economic slowdown could adversely affect us in the form of consumer behavior and
pressure on our investment portfolio. Consumer behavior could include decreased demand for
insurance. In 2008 and 2009, weakness in the housing market and a highly competitive environment
contributed to reduced growth in policies in
force. Our investment portfolio could be adversely affected as a result of deteriorating financial
and business conditions.
19
There can be no assurance that actions of the U.S. federal government, Federal Reserve and other
governmental and regulatory bodies for the purpose of stabilizing the financial markets and
stimulating the economy will achieve the intended effect
In response to the financial crises affecting the banking system, the financial markets and
the broader economy, the U.S. federal government, the Federal Reserve and other governmental and
regulatory bodies have taken or are considering taking action to address such conditions including,
among other things, purchasing mortgage-backed and other securities from financial institutions,
investing directly in banks, thrifts and bank and savings and loan holding companies and increasing
federal spending to stimulate the economy. There can be no assurance as to what impact such actions
will have on the financial markets or on economic conditions. Such continued volatility and
economic deterioration could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and
results of operations.
We are subject to extensive regulation and potential further restrictive regulation may increase
our operating costs and limit our growth
As an insurance company, we are subject to extensive laws and regulations. These laws and
regulations are complex and subject to change. Moreover, they are administered and enforced by a
number of different governmental authorities, including state insurance regulators, state
securities administrators, the SEC, the U.S. Department of Justice, and state attorneys general,
each of which exercises a degree of interpretive latitude. Consequently, we are subject to the risk
that compliance with any particular regulators or enforcement authoritys interpretation of a
legal issue may not result in compliance with anothers interpretation of the same issue,
particularly when compliance is judged in hindsight. In addition, there is risk that any particular
regulators or enforcement authoritys interpretation of a legal issue may change over time to our
detriment, or that changes in the overall legal environment may, even absent any particular
regulators or enforcement authoritys interpretation of a legal issue changing, cause us to change
our views regarding the actions we need to take from a legal risk management perspective, thus
necessitating changes to our practices that may, in some cases, limit our ability to grow and
improve the profitability of our business. Furthermore, in some cases, these laws and regulations
are designed to protect or benefit the interests of a specific constituency rather than a range of
constituencies. For example, state insurance laws and regulations are generally intended to protect
or benefit purchasers or users of insurance products, not holders of securities issued by the
Company. In many respects, these laws and regulations limit our ability to grow and improve the
profitability of our business.
In recent years, the state insurance regulatory framework has come under public scrutiny and
members of Congress have discussed proposals to provide for federal chartering of insurance
companies. We can make no assurances regarding the potential impact of state or federal measures
that may change the nature or scope of insurance regulation.
Reinsurance may be unavailable at current levels and prices, which may limit our ability to write
new business
Our reinsurance program was designed, utilizing our risk management methodology, to address
our exposure to catastrophes. Market conditions beyond our control determine the availability and
cost of the reinsurance we purchase. No assurances can be made that reinsurance will remain
continuously available to us to the same extent and on the same terms and rates as are currently
available. For example, our ability to afford reinsurance to reduce our catastrophe risk may be
dependent upon our ability to adjust premium rates for its cost, and there are no assurances that
the terms and rates for our current reinsurance program will continue to be available next year. If
we were unable to maintain our current level of reinsurance or purchase new reinsurance protection
in amounts that we consider sufficient and at prices that we consider acceptable, we would have to
either accept an increase in our exposure risk, reduce our insurance writings, or develop or seek
other alternatives.
Reinsurance subjects us to the credit risk of our reinsurers and may not be adequate to protect us
against losses arising from ceded insurance, which could have a material adverse effect on our
operating results and financial condition
The collectability of reinsurance recoverables is subject to uncertainty arising from a number
of factors, including changes in market conditions, whether insured losses meet the qualifying
conditions of the reinsurance contract and whether reinsurers, or their affiliates, have the
financial capacity and willingness to make payments under the terms of a reinsurance treaty or
contract. Our inability to collect a material recovery from a reinsurer could have a material
adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.
20
The continued threat of terrorism and ongoing military actions may adversely affect the level of
claim losses we incur and the value of our investment portfolio
The continued threat of terrorism, both within the United States and abroad, and ongoing
military and other actions and heightened security measures in response to these types of threats,
may cause significant volatility and losses from declines in the equity markets and from interest
rate changes in the United States, Europe and elsewhere, and result in loss of life, property
damage, disruptions to commerce and reduced economic activity. Some of the assets in our investment
portfolio may be adversely affected by reduced economic activity caused by the continued threat of
terrorism. Additionally, in the event that terrorist acts occur, the Company could be adversely
affected, depending on the nature of the event.
A downgrade in our financial strength ratings may have an adverse effect on our competitive
position, the marketability of our product offerings, and our liquidity, operating results and
financial condition
Financial strength ratings are important factors in establishing the competitive position of
insurance companies and generally have an effect on an insurance companys business. On an ongoing
basis, rating agencies review the financial performance and condition of insurers and could
downgrade or change the outlook on an insurers ratings due to, for example, a change in an
insurers statutory capital; a change in a rating agencys determination of the amount of
risk-adjusted capital required to maintain a particular rating; an increase in the perceived risk
of an insurers investment portfolio; a reduced confidence in management or a host of other
considerations that may or may not be under insurers control. The current insurance financial
strength rating of UPCIC is from Demotech, Inc. The assigned rating is A. Because this rating is
subject to continuous review, the retention of this rating cannot be assured. A downgrade in this
rating could have a material adverse effect on our sales, our competitiveness, the marketability of
our product offerings, and our liquidity, operating results and financial condition.
Adverse capital and credit market conditions may significantly affect our ability to meet liquidity
needs or our ability to obtain credit on acceptable terms
The capital and credit markets have been experiencing extreme volatility and disruption. In
some cases, the markets have exerted downward pressure on the availability of liquidity and credit
capacity. In the event that we need access to additional capital to pay our operating expenses,
make payments on our indebtedness, pay for capital expenditures or fund acquisitions, our ability
to obtain such capital may be limited and the cost of any such capital may be significant. Our
access to additional financing will depend on a variety of factors such as market conditions, the
general availability of credit, the overall availability of credit to our industry, and credit
capacity, as well as lenders perception of our long- or short-term financial prospects. Similarly,
our access to funds may be impaired if regulatory authorities or rating agencies take negative
actions against us. If a combination of these factors were to occur, our internal sources of
liquidity may prove to be insufficient, and in such case, we may not be able to successfully obtain
financing on favorable terms.
Changing climate conditions may adversely affect our financial condition, profitability or cash
flows
Property and casualty insurers are subject to claims arising from catastrophes. Catastrophic
losses have had a significant impact on our historical results. Catastrophes can be caused by
various events, including hurricanes, tsunamis, windstorms, earthquakes, hailstorms, explosions,
flooding, severe winter weather and fires and may include man-made events, such as terrorist
attacks. The incidence, frequency and severity of catastrophes are inherently unpredictable.
Longer-term weather trends may be changing and new types of catastrophe losses may be
developing due to climate change, a phenomenon that has been associated with extreme weather events
linked to rising temperatures, including effects on global weather patterns, greenhouse gases, sea,
land and air temperature, sea levels, rain and snow. The emerging science regarding climate change
and its connection to extreme weather events is far from conclusive. If a connection to increased
extreme weather events related to climate change is ultimately
proven true, this could increase the frequency and severity of catastrophe losses we experience in
both coastal and non-coastal areas.
Loss of key executives could affect our operations
21
UPCICs operations also depend in large part on the efforts of Bradley I. Meier, who serves as
President of UPCIC. Mr. Meier has also served as President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
of the Company since its inception in November 1990. In addition, UPCICs operations have become
materially dependent on the efforts of Sean P. Downes, who serves as Chief Operating Officer of
UPCIC. Mr. Downes has also served as Chief Operating Officer, Senior Vice President and Director of
the Company since January 2005 and as a Director of UPCIC since May 2003. The loss of the services
provided by either Mr. Meier or Mr. Downes could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the
Companys financial condition and results of operations. In addition, if Mr. Meier were to become
incapacitated or elect to reduce his responsibilities with the Company, we would expect that Mr.
Downes would assume his responsibilities.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
On July 31, 2004, the Company purchased a building located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida that
became its headquarters on July 1, 2005. The building is 100% occupied by
the Company. There is no mortgage or lease arrangement. The building is adequately covered by
insurance.
On April 30, 2010, the Company purchased a 9,000 square foot building located in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida contiguous to its existing headquarters that it intends to use as additional
home office space.
The Company believes that those buildings will be suitable for their intended use
and adequate to meet the Companys current and future needs. The building will be 100% utilized by
the Company. The building is currently unoccupied. There is no mortgage or lease arrangement. The
building is adequately covered by insurance.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Company is involved in certain lawsuits. In the opinion of management, none of these
lawsuits (1) involve claims for damages exceeding 10% of the Companys cash and invested assets,
(2) involve matters that are not routine litigation incidental to the claims aspect of its
business, (3) involve bankruptcy, receivership or similar proceedings, (4) involve material
Federal, state, or local environmental laws, (5) potentially involve more than $100,000 in
sanctions and a governmental authority is a party, or (6) are material proceedings to which any
director, officer, affiliate of the Company, beneficial owner of more than 5% of any class of
voting securities of the Company, or security holder is a party adverse to the Company or has a
material interest adverse to the Company.
ITEM 4. RESERVED
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF
EQUITY SECURITIES
The Companys Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share (Common Stock), is quoted on the NYSE
Amex LLC (NYSE Amex) formerly known as the American Stock Exchange, under the symbol UVE. The
Companys common shares were quoted and traded on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol UVIH
prior to April 30, 2007 when the Company commenced trading on the NYSE Amex. The following table
sets forth prices of the Common Stock, as reported by the NYSE Amex.
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For year ended December 31, 2010 |
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
|
Dividends Declared |
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
6.72 |
|
|
$ |
4.59 |
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
5.30 |
|
|
$ |
4.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
4.75 |
|
|
$ |
3.98 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
5.15 |
|
|
$ |
4.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For year ended December 31, 2009 |
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
|
Dividends Declared |
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
4.58 |
|
|
$ |
2.40 |
|
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
5.96 |
|
|
$ |
3.65 |
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
5.70 |
|
|
$ |
4.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
6.45 |
|
|
$ |
4.90 |
|
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
As of March 15, 2011, there were approximately 41 shareholders of record of the Companys
Common Stock.
As of December 31, 2010, there were 2 and 4 shareholders of the Companys Series A and Series
M Preferred Stock (Preferred Stock) respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2010,
shareholders converted 950 shares of Series M Preferred Stock into 1,187 shares of Common Stock.
During the year ended December 31, 2009, shareholders converted 30,000 shares of Series A Preferred
Stock into 75,000 shares of Common Stock.
During 2010 and 2009, respectively, the Company declared and paid aggregate dividends of
$19,950 and $27,450 on the Companys Series A Preferred Stock.
Applicable provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may affect the ability of the
Company to declare and pay dividends on its Common Stock. In particular, pursuant to the Delaware
General Corporation Law, a company may pay dividends out of its surplus, as defined, or out of its
net profits, for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding year.
Surplus is defined in the Delaware General Corporation Law to be the excess of net assets of the
company over capital. Capital is defined to be the aggregate par value of shares issued. Moreover,
the ability of the Company to pay dividends, if and when declared by its Board of Directors, may be
restricted by regulatory limits on the amount of dividends, which UPCIC is permitted to pay the
Company. Section 628.371 of the Florida Statutes sets forth limitations, based on net income and
statutory capital, on the amount of dividends that UPCIC may pay to the Company without approval
from the OIR.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table sets forth certain information with respect to all of the Companys equity
compensation plans in effect as of fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
securities |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
remaining available |
|
|
|
securities to be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
for issuance under |
|
|
|
issued upon |
|
|
Weighted-average |
|
|
equity compensation |
|
|
|
exercise of |
|
|
exercise price of |
|
|
plans (excluding |
|
|
|
outstanding |
|
|
outstanding |
|
|
securities |
|
|
|
options, warrants |
|
|
options, warrants |
|
|
reflected in first |
|
Plan Category |
|
and rights |
|
|
and rights |
|
|
column) |
|
|
Equity compensation
plans
approved by
security holders |
|
|
1,665,000 |
|
|
$ |
5.07 |
|
|
|
135,000 |
|
Equity
compensation
plans not
approved by
security holders |
|
|
3,720,000 |
|
|
$ |
4.50 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Total |
|
|
5,385,000 |
|
|
$ |
4.68 |
|
|
|
135,000 |
|
23
On October 13, 2009, the Companys Board of Directors approved, and recommended that the
Companys stockholders approve, the 2009 Omnibus Incentive Plan (Incentive Plan). On November 16,
2009, the Companys stockholders approved the Incentive Plan by written consent.
The total number of shares issuable under the incentive plan is 1,800,000 shares of common
stock, par value, $0.01 per share. Awards under the Incentive Plan may include incentive stock
options, nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares of Common Stock,
restricted stock units, performance share or unit awards, other stock-based awards and cash-based
incentive awards. Awards under the Incentive Plan may be granted to employees, directors,
consultants or other persons providing services to the Company or its affiliates. The Incentive
Plan also provides for awards that are intended to qualify as performance-based compensation in
order to preserve the deductibility of such compensation by the Company under Section 162(m) of the
Internal Revenue Code. The Incentive Plan shall have a term of ten years expiring on November 16,
2019.
Stock Performance Graph
The following graph compares the cumulative total stockholder return of the Companys Common
Stock from December 31, 2005 through December 31, 2010 with the cumulative total return of the SNL
Insurance P&C and the Amex Composite. SNL Insurance P&C includes all publicly traded insurance
underwriters in the property and casualty sector and was prepared by SNL Financial,
Charlottesville, Virginia. The graph assumes the investment of $100 in the Companys Common Stock
and in each of the two indices on December 31, 2005 with all dividends being reinvested on the
ex-dividend date. The closing price of the Companys Common Stock on December 31, 2005 (the last
trading day of the year) was 0.770 per share. The stock price performance on the graph is not
necessarily indicative of future price performance.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period Ending |
|
Index |
|
12/31/05 |
|
|
12/31/06 |
|
|
12/31/07 |
|
|
12/31/08 |
|
|
12/31/09 |
|
|
12/31/10 |
|
Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
393.76 |
|
|
|
1085.47 |
|
|
|
411.72 |
|
|
|
1117.46 |
|
|
|
989.91 |
|
SNL Insurance P&C |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
116.57 |
|
|
|
125.86 |
|
|
|
97.42 |
|
|
|
105.33 |
|
|
|
125.60 |
|
Amex Composite |
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
119.94 |
|
|
|
145.36 |
|
|
|
86.56 |
|
|
|
117.36 |
|
|
|
147.40 |
|
(1) The stock prices used to calculate total shareholder return for Universal Insurance Holdings,
Inc. are based upon the prices of the Companys common shares quoted and traded on the OTC Bulletin
Board under the symbol UVIH prior to April 30, 2007 and the NYSE Amex on subsequent dates.
Future Dividend Policy
Future cash dividend payments are subject to business conditions, the Companys financial
position, and requirements for working capital and other corporate purposes.
Stock Repurchases
24
The following table presents information related to repurchases of our Common Stock during the
three months ended December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Number (or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
Approximate Dollar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased as |
|
|
Value) of Shares That |
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of Publicly |
|
|
May Yet be Purchased |
|
|
|
Shares Purchased |
|
|
Average Price Paid |
|
|
Announced Plans or |
|
|
Under the Plans or |
|
Period |
|
(1) |
|
|
per Share |
|
|
Programs |
|
|
Programs |
|
October 1-31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November 1-30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 1-31, 2010 |
|
|
173,035 |
|
|
|
4.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
173,035 |
|
|
$ |
4.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
All shares acquired represent shares tendered in connection with cashless exercises of
stock options and vested shares of restricted stock. Amounts tendered were to cover either the
strike price for option exercises or tax withholdings on the intrinsic value of stock option
exercises and fair value of vested shares of restricted stock. These shares were subsequently
cancelled by the Company. |
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with the
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto and Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations appearing elsewhere in the Annual Report on Form
10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Income statement data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct premiums written |
|
$ |
666,309,262 |
|
|
$ |
562,671,620 |
|
|
$ |
511,369,676 |
|
|
$ |
498,748,778 |
|
|
$ |
371,754,514 |
|
Ceded premiums written |
|
|
(466,694,053 |
) |
|
|
(428,384,278 |
) |
|
|
(360,581,696 |
) |
|
|
(358,405,016 |
) |
|
|
(230,718,709 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net premiums written |
|
|
199,615,209 |
|
|
|
134,287,342 |
|
|
|
150,787,980 |
|
|
|
140,343,762 |
|
|
|
141,035,805 |
|
(Increase) decrease in net unearned premium |
|
|
(29,172,312 |
) |
|
|
7,366,383 |
|
|
|
(3,374,283 |
) |
|
|
14,074,690 |
|
|
|
(86,899,853 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned, net |
|
|
170,442,897 |
|
|
|
141,653,725 |
|
|
|
147,413,697 |
|
|
|
154,418,452 |
|
|
|
54,135,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
|
239,923,232 |
|
|
|
210,642,129 |
|
|
|
182,667,296 |
|
|
|
188,514,481 |
|
|
|
65,147,750 |
|
Total expenses |
|
|
177,645,429 |
|
|
|
164,479,305 |
|
|
|
116,660,531 |
|
|
|
98,964,692 |
|
|
|
38,426,441 |
|
Income from continuing operations before
income taxes |
|
|
62,277,803 |
|
|
|
46,162,824 |
|
|
|
66,006,765 |
|
|
|
89,549,789 |
|
|
|
26,721,309 |
|
Income taxes, net |
|
|
25,294,041 |
|
|
|
17,375,526 |
|
|
|
25,969,442 |
|
|
|
35,547,501 |
|
|
|
9,477,240 |
|
Discontinued Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(57,209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
36,983,762 |
|
|
$ |
28,787,298 |
|
|
$ |
40,037,323 |
|
|
$ |
54,002,288 |
|
|
$ |
17,186,860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance sheet data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
766,230,240 |
|
|
$ |
678,247,300 |
|
|
$ |
544,636,912 |
|
|
$ |
491,193,365 |
|
|
$ |
481,610,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
$ |
626,440,612 |
|
|
$ |
564,972,843 |
|
|
$ |
443,083,257 |
|
|
$ |
418,618,180 |
|
|
$ |
459,562,506 |
|
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
$ |
158,928,837 |
|
|
$ |
127,197,753 |
|
|
$ |
87,947,774 |
|
|
$ |
68,815,500 |
|
|
$ |
49,564,514 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
$ |
328,334,547 |
|
|
$ |
278,370,544 |
|
|
$ |
258,489,460 |
|
|
$ |
254,741,198 |
|
|
$ |
230,346,266 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
$ |
23,161,764 |
|
|
$ |
24,632,353 |
|
|
$ |
25,000,000 |
|
|
$ |
25,000,000 |
|
|
$ |
25,057,266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
$ |
139,789,628 |
|
|
$ |
113,274,457 |
|
|
$ |
101,553,655 |
|
|
$ |
72,575,185 |
|
|
$ |
22,047,918 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income per common share from
continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.95 |
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
$ |
1.07 |
|
|
$ |
1.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.50 |
|
Fully diluted net income per common share from
continuing operations |
|
$ |
0.92 |
|
|
$ |
0.71 |
|
|
$ |
0.99 |
|
|
$ |
1.31 |
|
|
$ |
0.44 |
|
Dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
0.54 |
|
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
$ |
0.24 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
A number of statements contained in this report are forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 that involve risks and
uncertainties that could cause actual results
25
to differ materially from those expressed or implied
in the applicable statements. These risks and uncertainties include but are not limited to the
costs and the uncertainties associated with the Risk Factors set forth in Item 1 above. Investors
are cautioned that these forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or
results.
OVERVIEW
The Company is a vertically-integrated insurance holding company, which through its various
subsidiaries, covers substantially all aspects of insurance underwriting, distribution and claims
processing. The Companys primary product is homeowners insurance which it currently provides in
four states. Florida represented 98% of its in-force policies as of December 31, 2010. The
Companys criteria for selecting insurance policies includes, but is not limited to, the use of
specific policy forms, coverage amounts on buildings and contents and required compliance with
local building codes. Also, to improve underwriting and manage risk, the Company utilizes standard
industry modeling techniques for hurricane and windstorm exposure. UPCICs in-force policies as of
December 31, 2010 include 572,435 policies with coverage for wind risks and 11,443 policies without
wind risks. The average premium for a policy with wind coverage was $1,155, and the average premium
for a policy without wind coverage was $507. UPCIC had in-force premiums of approximately $667.1
million as of December 31, 2010.
The Company generates revenues primarily from the collection of premiums and the investment of
those premiums. Other significant sources of revenue include commissions collected from reinsurers
and policy fees.
The Company joined the Russell 3000® Index on June 26, 2009 and remains a member as of the
most recent reconstitution date. According to publicly available information provided on Russells
Website, annual reconstitution of Russells U.S. indices captures the 3,000 largest U.S. stocks as
of the end of May, ranking them by total market capitalization. Membership in the Russell 3000,
which remains in place for one year, means automatic inclusion in the large-cap Russell 1000® Index
or small-cap Russell 2000® Index as well as the appropriate growth and value style indices.
Russell determines membership for its equity indices primarily by objective, market-capitalization
rankings and style attributes. Russell indices are widely used by investment managers and
institutional investors for index funds and as benchmarks for both passive and active investment
strategies. The Company believes that its inclusion in the Russell 3000® Index will lead to
additional visibility in the investment community.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Use of Estimates. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) requires management to make estimates
and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts
of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods. The Companys primary areas of estimate are
described below.
Recognition of Premium Revenues. Property and liability premiums are recognized as revenue on a
pro rata basis over the policy term. The portion of premiums that will be earned in the future are
deferred and reported as unearned premiums. The Company believes that its revenue recognition
policies conform to Staff Accounting Bulletin 101, Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements.
Insurance Liabilities. Reserves are established to provide for the estimated costs of paying
losses and LAE under insurance policies UPCIC has issued. Underwriting results are significantly
influenced by estimates of losses and LAE reserves. These reserves are an estimate of amounts
necessary to settle all outstanding claims, including claims that have been incurred but not
reported (IBNR), as of the financial statement date.
Characteristics of Reserves. Reserves are established based on estimates of the ultimate cost to
settle claims, less losses that have been paid. Claims are typically reported promptly with
relatively little reporting lag between the date of occurrence and the date the loss is reported.
UPCICs claim settlement data suggests that homeowners property losses have an average settlement
time of less than one year, while homeowners liability losses generally take an average of about
two years to settle.
Reserves are the difference between the estimated ultimate cost of losses incurred and the
amount of paid losses as of the reporting date. Reserves are estimated for both reported and
unreported claims, and include estimates of all expenses associated with processing and settling
all incurred claims. We update reserve estimates quarterly as new information becomes available or
as events emerge that may affect the resolution of unsettled claims. Changes in prior year reserve
estimates (reserve re-estimates), which may be material, are determined by comparing updated
26
estimates of ultimate losses to prior estimates, and the differences are recorded as losses and LAE
in the Consolidated Statements of Income in the period such changes are determined. Estimating
the ultimate cost of losses and LAE is an inherently uncertain and complex process involving a high
degree of judgment and is subject to the evaluation of numerous variables.
The Actuarial Methods used to Develop Reserve Estimates. Reserves for losses and LAE are
determined in three separate steps. These steps are the estimation of reserves for non-catastrophe
loss and defense and cost containment (DCC) expenses (hereafter referred to simply as losses),
estimation of reserves for hurricane experience, and estimation of reserves for Adjusting and Other
(AO) expenses. These three steps are further separated into the analysis of data groupings of
like exposure. These groups are property damage on homeowner policy forms HO-3 and HO-8 combined,
property damage on homeowner policy forms HO-4 and HO-6 combined, dwelling fire property damage,
all homeowner liability exposure, other liability (the optional liability coverage offered to
dwelling fire policyholders), and all hurricane experience combined.
Reserve estimates for non-catastrophe losses are derived using several different actuarial
estimation methods that are variations on one primary actuarial technique. That actuarial technique
is known as a chain ladder estimation process in which historical loss patterns are applied to
actual paid losses and reported losses (paid losses plus individual case reserves established by
claim adjusters) for an accident year to create an estimate of how losses are likely to develop
over time. This technique forms the basis of the six actuarial methods described below. An
accident year refers to classifying claims based on the year in which the claims occurred,
regardless of the date it was reported to UPCIC. This analysis is used to prepare estimates of
required reserves for payments to be made in the future. The key data elements used to determine
our reserve estimates include claim counts, paid losses, paid DCC, case reserves, and the related
development factors applicable to this data.
The first method for estimating unpaid amounts for non-hurricane losses is the reported development
method. This method is based upon the assumption that the relative change in a given years
reported loss estimates from one evaluation point to the next is similar to the relative change in
prior years reported loss estimates at similar evaluation points. In utilizing this method, actual
annual historical reported loss data is evaluated. Successive years can be arranged to form a
triangle of data. Report-to-report (RTR) development factors are calculated to measure the
change in cumulative reported losses from one evaluation point to the next. These historical RTR
factors form the basis for selecting the RTR factors used in projecting the current valuation of
losses to an ultimate basis. In addition, a tail factor is selected to account for loss development
beyond the observed experience. The tail factor is based on trends shown in the data and
consideration of industry loss development benchmarks. This methods implicit assumption is that
the relative adequacy of case reserves has been consistent over time, and that there have been no
material changes in the rate at which claims have been reported.
The second method is the paid development method. This method is similar to the reported
development method; however, case reserves are excluded from the analysis. While this method has
the disadvantage of not recognizing the information provided by current case reserves, it has the
advantage of avoiding potential distortions in the data due to changes in case reserving
methodology. This methods implicit assumption is that the rate of payment of claims has been
relatively consistent over time.
The third method is the reported Bornhuetter-Ferguson (B-F) method. This method is essentially a
blend of two other methods. The first method is the loss development method (described above),
whereby actual reported losses are multiplied by an expected loss development factor. For slow
reporting coverages, the loss development method can lead to erratic and unreliable projections,
because a relatively small swing in early reporting periods can result in a large swing in ultimate
projections. The second method is the expected loss method (a description of the expected loss
method follows the description of the reported B-F method), whereby the IBNR estimate equals the
difference between a predetermined estimate of expected losses and actual reported losses. This has
the advantage of stability, but it does not respond to actual results as they emerge. The reported
B-F method combines these two methods by setting ultimate losses equal to actual reported losses
plus expected unreported losses. As an experience year matures and expected unreported losses become smaller, the initial expected loss assumption becomes
gradually less important. Two parameters are needed to apply the B-F method: the initial expected
loss ratio and the expected reporting pattern. The initial expected loss ratio for each accident
year other than the current year is set equal to the estimated ultimate loss ratio from the prior
analysis. The initial expected loss ratio for the current year is determined based on trends in
historical ratios, rate changes, and underlying loss trends. The expected reporting pattern is
based on the reported loss development method described above. This method is often used for
long-tail lines and in situations where the reported loss experience is relatively immature or
lacks sufficient credibility for the application of other methods.
As mentioned above, one component of the B-F method is the expected loss method. In this method,
ultimate loss projections are based upon some prior measure of the anticipated losses, usually
relative to some measure of
27
exposure, such as premiums, revenues, or payroll. An expected loss
ratio (or loss cost/pure premium) is applied to the measure of exposure to determine estimated
ultimate losses for each year. Actual losses are not considered in this calculation. This method
has the advantage of stability over time because the ultimate loss estimates do not change unless
the exposures or pure premiums change. However, this advantage of stability is offset by a lack of
responsiveness, since this method does not consider actual loss experience as it emerges. This
method is based on the assumption that the pure premium per unit of exposure is a good indication
of ultimate losses. It is entirely dependent on pricing assumptions.
The fourth method is the paid B-F method. This method is analogous to the reported B-F method
using paid losses and development patterns in place of reported losses and patterns.
The fifth method is the reported counts and averages method. In this method, an estimate of unpaid
losses is determined by separately projecting ultimate reported claim counts and ultimate reported
claim severities (cost per reported claim) for each accident period. Typically, loss development
methods are used to project ultimate claim counts and claim severities based on historical data
using the same methodology described in the reported development method above. Estimated ultimate
losses are then calculated as the product of the two items. This method is intended to avoid data
distortions that may exist with the other methods for the most recent years as a result of changes
in case reserve levels, settlement rates, etc. In addition, it may provide insight into the
drivers of loss experience.
The sixth method is the paid counts and averages method. This method is analogous to the reported
counts and averages method using paid claims counts and paid claim severities and their related
development patterns in place of reported data.
In selecting the RTR development factors described above, due consideration is given to how the RTR
development factors change from one year to the next over the course of several consecutive years
of recent history. In addition to the loss development triangles cited above, various diagnostic
triangles, such as triangles showing historical patterns in the ratio of paid to reported losses
and paid to reported claim counts are typically prepared as a means of determining the stability of
various determinants of loss development, such as consistency in claims settlement and case
reserving.
The implicit assumption of these techniques is that the selected RTR factors combine to form loss
development patterns that are predictive of future loss development. The effects of inflation are
implicitly considered in the reserving process, the implicit assumption being that the selected
development factors includes an adequate provision. Occasionally, unusual aberrations in loss
patterns are caused by external and internal factors such as changes in claim reporting, settlement
patterns, unusually large losses, an unusually large amount of catastrophe losses, process changes,
legal or regulatory changes, and other influences. In these instances, analyses of alternate
development factor selections are performed to evaluate the effect of these factors, and actuarial
judgment is applied to make appropriate development factor assumptions needed to develop a best
estimate of ultimate losses.
The six methods described above all produce an estimate of ultimate losses. Based on the results
of these six methods, a single estimate (commonly referred to as a actuarial point/central
estimate) of the ultimate loss is selected. Estimated IBNR reserves are determined by subtracting
the reported loss from the selected ultimate loss. The estimated IBNR reserves are added to case
reserves to determine the total estimated unpaid losses.
Estimates of unpaid losses for hurricane experience are not developed using company specific
development patterns, due to the relatively infrequent nature of storms and the high severity
typically associated with them. Both the reported development method and the paid development
method were used to estimate ultimate losses. However, the development patterns were based on
industry data determined by our consulting actuary. There is an inherent
assumption that relying on industry development patterns as opposed to company specific patterns
produces more credible results for projecting hurricane losses.
Estimated unpaid amounts for non-catastrophe AO expenses are determined as the product of the
estimated number of outstanding claims (whether open or unreported) times an estimate of average AO
per claim. Universals claims are handled by Universal Adjusting Corporation (UAC), a wholly
owned subsidiary. UAC is compensated based on a fee schedule as follows:
28
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Repair |
|
Adjusting Fee |
|
$0 to $1,500 |
|
$ |
318 |
|
$1,501 to $2,500 |
|
$ |
426 |
|
$2,501 to $3,500 |
|
$ |
534 |
|
$3,501 to $5,000 |
|
$ |
607 |
|
$5,001 to $7,500 |
|
$ |
715 |
|
$7,501 to $10,000 |
|
$ |
783 |
|
In cases where a claim exceeds $10,000, UAC is compensated on a time and expense basis based on the
following fee schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
Category |
|
Fee |
|
Non-Clerical |
|
$70/hour |
Clerical |
|
$45/hour |
Mileage |
|
$0.45/mile |
Photographs |
|
$2.25/each |
UAC is compensated at the time a claim is closed (whether with or without payment).
The procedure we followed was to begin by developing a history of average AO expenses per closed
claim (whether with or without payment) for each line of business. Since average fees have
increased dramatically in the last two years, we placed reliance primarily on the indications from
those two years in making our selections. The selected average AO expense was then multiplied by
the estimated number of claims to be closed in the future (whether with or without payment) to
determine an estimated liability. The estimated number of claims to be closed in the future was
determined by projecting reported claims for each accident year to an estimated ultimate basis
using the traditional development factor method, then subtracting the total number of claims that
have closed as of December 31, 2010 (whether with or without payment).
In the case of the AO liabilities associated with hurricane exposure, a similar procedure was used
to determine an estimate of the average AO expense per closed claim as was used for the
non-catastrophe AO liabilities. However, a different procedure was used to estimate the number of
claims to be closed in the future since the reported claim count development method would not
produce a reliable estimate of ultimate hurricane claims. Three separate estimates of outstanding
claims were determined. In one method, estimated outstanding claims were determined as the ratio
of estimated unpaid losses to estimated claim severity, where claim severity was estimated as the
ratio of paid losses to closed claims. In the second method, estimated outstanding claims were
determined as the ratio of estimated unpaid losses to estimated claim severity, where estimated
claim severity was determined as the ratio of reported losses to reported claims. In the third
method, estimated outstanding claims were determined as the ratio of estimated unpaid losses to
estimated claim severity, where claim severity was determined as the ratio of case reserves to open
claims. Based on these three methods a final selection was made on estimated outstanding claim
counts. The final selection is multiplied by estimated average AO expense per claim to derive the
estimated liability.
How Reserve Estimates are Established and Updated. Reserve estimates are developed for both open
claims and IBNR claims. The actuarial methods described above are used to derive claim settlement
patterns by determining development factors to be applied to specific data elements. Development factors are calculated for
data elements such as claim counts reported and settled, paid losses and paid losses combined with
case reserves. The historical development patterns for these data elements are used as the
assumptions to calculate reserve estimates.
Often, different estimates are prepared for each detailed component, incorporating alternative
analyses of changing claim settlement patterns and other influences on losses, from which we select
our best estimate for each component, occasionally incorporating additional analyses and actuarial
judgment, as described above. These estimates are not based on a single set of assumptions. Based
on our review of these estimates, our best estimate of required reserves is recorded for each
accident year, and the required reserves are summed to create the reserve balance carried on our
Consolidated Balance Sheets.
29
Reserves are re-estimated quarterly, by combining historical results with current actual results.
This process incorporates the historic and latest trends, and other underlying changes in the data
elements used to calculate reserve estimates. When actual development of claims reported, paid
losses or case reserve changes are different than the historical development pattern used in a
prior period reserve estimate, a new reserve is determined. The difference between indicated
reserves based on new reserve estimates and recorded reserves (the previous estimate) is the amount
of reserve re-estimate and an increase or decrease in losses and LAE will be recorded in the
Consolidated Statements of Income. Total reserve re-estimates, after-tax, as a percent of net
income, in 2010, 2009 and 2008 were 9.9%, 18.1%, and 9.5%, respectively, which are consistent
within a reasonable actuarial tolerance for our business Reserve re-estimates were primarily the
result of actual loss development on prior year non-catastrophe losses during the years ending
December 31, 2009 and 2008, and from higher than expected 2004 hurricane losses and actual loss
development on prior year non-catastrophe losses during the year ended December 31, 2007. Reserve
re-estimates on non-catastrophe losses, which have been well within acceptable ranges, are a result
of settling homeowners losses established in the prior year for amounts that were more than
expected. These reserve re-estimates were primarily the result of claim severity development that
was worse than expected and late reported loss development that was worse than expected due to
higher frequency trends. These trends are consistent with the trends of other carriers in the
industry, which we believe are related to increased publicity and awareness of coverage and
litigation. These trends are primarily responsible for revisions to loss development factors, as
previously described, to predict how losses are likely to develop from the end of the reporting
period until all claims have been paid. Because these trends cause actual losses to differ from
those predicted by the estimated development factors used in prior reserve estimates, reserves are
revised as actuarial studies validate new trends based on indications of updated development factor
calculations. Reserve re-estimates for catastrophe losses, which are associated with the high level
of uncertainty related to hurricane claims are described under catastrophe losses below.
Factors Affecting Reserve Estimates. Reserve estimates are developed based on the processes and
historical development trends as previously described. These estimates are considered in
conjunction with known facts and interpretations of circumstances and factors including our
experience with similar cases, actual claims paid, differing payment patterns and pending levels of
unpaid claims, loss management programs, product mix and contractual terms, changes in law and
regulation, judicial decisions, and economic conditions. When we experience changes of the type
previously mentioned, we may need to apply actuarial judgment in the determination and selection of
development factors considered more reflective of the new trends, such as combining shorter or
longer periods of historical results with current actual results to produce development factors.
For example, if a legal change is expected to have a significant impact on the development of claim
severity, actuarial judgment is applied to determine appropriate development factors that will most
accurately reflect the expected impact on that specific estimate. Another example would be when a
change in economic conditions is expected to affect the cost of repairs to property; actuarial
judgment is applied to determine appropriate development factors to use in the reserve estimate
that will most accurately reflect the expected impacts on severity development.
As claims are reported, for certain liability claims of sufficient size and complexity, the field
adjusting staff establishes case reserve estimates of ultimate cost, based on their assessment of
facts and circumstances related to each individual claim. For other claims which occur in large
volumes and settle in a relatively short time frame, it is not practical or efficient to set case
reserves for each claim, and an initial case reserve of $2,500 is set for these claims. In the
normal course of business, we may also supplement our claims processes by utilizing third party
adjusters, appraisers, engineers, inspectors, other professionals and information sources to assess
and settle catastrophe and non-catastrophe related claims.
Changes in homeowners current year claim severity are generally influenced by inflation in the cost
of building materials, the cost of construction and property repair services, the cost of replacing
home furnishings and other contents, the types of claims that qualify for coverage, deductibles and
other economic and environmental factors. We employ various loss management programs to mitigate
the effect of these factors.
As loss experience for the current year develops for each type of loss, it is monitored relative to
initial assumptions until it is judged to have sufficient statistical credibility. From that point
in time and forward, reserves are re-estimated using statistical actuarial processes to reflect the
impact loss trends have on development factors incorporated into the actuarial estimation
processes. Statistical credibility is usually achieved by the end of the first calendar year;
however, when trends for the current accident year exceed initial assumptions sooner, they are
usually given credibility, and reserves are increased accordingly.
Key assumptions that materially affect the estimate of the reserve for loss and LAE relate to the
effects of emerging claim and coverage issues. As industry practices and legal, judicial, social
and other environmental conditions change, unexpected and unintended issues related to claim and
coverage may emerge. These issues may adversely
30
affect our business by either extending coverage
beyond our underwriting intent or by increasing the number or size of claims. Key assumptions as of
December 31, 2010 that are premised on future emergence that are inconsistent with historical loss
reserve development patterns include but are not limited to:
|
|
|
adverse changes in loss cost trends, including inflationary pressures in home repair
costs; |
|
|
|
|
judicial expansion of policy coverage and the impact of new theories of liability; and |
|
|
|
|
plaintiffs targeting property and casualty insurers, in purported class action
litigation related to claims-handling and other practices. |
By applying standard actuarial methods to consolidated historic accident year loss data for
homeowner losses, we develop variability analyses consistent with the way we develop reserves by
measuring the potential variability of development factors, as described in the section titled,
Potential Reserve Estimate Variability below.
Causes of Reserve Estimate Uncertainty. Since reserves are estimates of the unpaid portions of
claims and claims expenses that have occurred, including IBNR losses, the establishment of
appropriate reserves, including reserves for catastrophes, requires regular reevaluation and
refinement of estimates to determine our ultimate loss estimate.
At each reporting date, the highest degree of uncertainty in estimates of losses arises from claims
remaining to be settled for the current accident year and the most recent preceding accident year
and claims that have occurred but have not been reported (pure IBNR claims). The greatest degree of
uncertainty exists in the current accident year because the current accident year contains the
greatest proportion of losses that have not been reported or settled but must be estimated as of
the current reporting date. Most of these losses are related to damaged homes. During the first
year after the end of an accident year, a large portion of the total losses for that accident year
are settled. When accident year losses paid through the end of the first year following the initial
accident year are incorporated into updated actuarial estimates, the trends inherent in the
settlement of claims emerge more clearly. Consequently, this is the point in time at which we tend
to make our largest re-estimates of losses for an accident year. After the second year, the losses
that we pay for an accident year typically relate to claims that are more difficult to settle, such
as those involving litigation.
Reserves for Catastrophe Losses. Loss and LAE reserves also include reserves for catastrophe
losses. Catastrophe losses are an inherent risk of the property-casualty insurance industry that
have contributed, and will continue to contribute, to potentially material year-to-year
fluctuations in our results of operations and financial position. A catastrophe is an event that
produces significant pre-tax losses before reinsurance and involves multiple first party
policyholders, or an event that produces a number of claims in excess of a preset, per-event
threshold of average claims in a specific area, occurring within a certain amount of time following
the event. Catastrophes are caused by various natural events including high winds, tornadoes,
wildfires, tropical storms and hurricanes. The nature and level of catastrophes in any period
cannot be predicted.
The estimation of claims and claims expense reserves for catastrophes also comprises estimates of
losses from reported claims and IBNR, primarily for damage to property. In general, our estimates
for catastrophe reserves are based on claim adjuster inspections and the application of historical
loss development factors as described previously. However, depending on the nature of the
catastrophe, as noted above, the estimation process can be further complicated. For example, for
hurricanes, complications could include the inability of insureds to be able to promptly report
losses, limitations placed on claims adjusting staff affecting their ability to inspect losses,
determining whether losses are covered by our homeowners policy (generally for damage caused by
wind or wind driven rain), or specifically excluded coverage caused by flood, estimating additional
living expenses, and assessing the impact of demand surge, exposure to mold damage, and the effects
of numerous other considerations, including the timing of a catastrophe in relation to other
events, such as at or near the end of a financial reporting period,
which can affect the availability of information needed to estimate reserves for that reporting
period. In these situations, we may need to adapt our practices to accommodate these circumstances
in order to determine a best estimate of our losses from a catastrophe.
Key Actuarial Assumptions That Affect the Loss and LAE Estimate. The aggregation of estimates
for reported losses and IBNR forms the reserve liability recorded in the Consolidated Balance
Sheets.
To develop a statistical indication of potential reserve variability within reasonably likely
possible outcomes, actuarial techniques are applied to the data elements for paid losses and
reported losses separately for homeowners
31
losses excluding catastrophe losses and catastrophe
losses to estimate the potential variability of our reserves, within a reasonable probability of
outcomes.
At any given point in time, our loss reserve represents our best estimate of the ultimate
settlement and administration cost of our insured claims incurred and unpaid. Since the process of
estimating loss reserves requires significant judgment due to a number of variables, such as
fluctuations in inflation, judicial decisions, legislative changes and changes in claims handling
procedures, our ultimate liability may exceed or be less than these estimates. We revise reserves
for losses and LAE as additional information becomes available, and reflect adjustments, if any, in
earnings in the periods in which they are determined.
On an annual basis, our independent actuary provides a Statement of Actuarial Opinion (SAO) that
certifies the carried reserves make a reasonable provision for all of UPCICs unpaid loss and LAE
obligations under the terms of our contracts and agreements with our policyholders. We review the
SAO and compare the projected ultimate losses and LAE per the SAO to our own projection of ultimate
losses and LAE to ensure that loss and LAE reserves recorded at each annual balance sheet date are
based upon our analysis of all internal and external factors related to known and unknown claims
against us and to ensure our reserves are within National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) guidelines. We compare our recorded reserves to the indicated range provided in the report
accompanying the SAO. At December 31, 2010, the recorded amount for net loss and LAE falls within
the range determined by our independent actuaries and is higher than their best estimate.
In selecting the RTR development factors described above in the section titled The Actuarial
Methods used to Develop Reserve Estimates, due consideration is given to how the RTR development
factors change from one year to the next over the course of several consecutive years of recent
history. In addition to the loss development triangles cited above, various diagnostic triangles,
such as triangles showing historical patterns in the ratio of paid to reported losses and paid to
reported claim counts, are typically prepared as a means of determining the stability of various
determinants of loss development, such as consistency in claims settlement and case reserving.
With respect to Universals primary exposure, Florida personal property coverage, the hurricanes in
2004 and 2005 required Universal to place more focus on adjusting hurricane claims during 2004,
2005 and into 2006. Universal then experienced a surge in non-hurricane claims which led the loss
development patterns for non-catastrophe losses to increase substantially in the years during and
following the active hurricane seasons of 2004 and 2005.
Potential Reserve Estimate Variability. Given the nature of Universals business
(catastrophe-exposed personal property coverage), the methods employed by actuaries include a
range of estimated unpaid losses reflecting a level of uncertainty. The range of estimated ultimate
losses is typically smaller for older, more mature accident periods and greater for more recent,
less mature accident periods. The greatest level of uncertainty is associated with accident years
during which catastrophe events occurred. For example, the increased uncertainty associated with
accident years 2004 and 2005 increases the bounds of the range.
In selecting the range of reasonable estimates, the assumptions used to select development factors
and initial expected loss ratios are not changed. Rather, the range of indications produced by the
various methods is inspected, the relative strengths and weaknesses of each method are considered,
and from those inputs a range of estimates can be selected.
Projections of loss and LAE liabilities are subject to potentially large errors of estimation since
the ultimate disposition of claims incurred prior to the financial statement date, whether reported
or not, is subject to the outcome of events that have not yet occurred. Examples of these events
include jury decisions, court interpretations, legislative changes, public attitudes, and
social/economic conditions such as inflation. Any estimate of future costs is subject to the
inherent limitation on ones ability to predict the aggregate course of future events. It should
therefore be expected that the actual emergence of losses and LAE will vary, perhaps materially,
from any estimate.
The inherent uncertainty associated with UPCICs loss and LAE liability is magnified due to UPCICs
concentration of property business in catastrophe-exposed coastal states, primarily Florida. The
2004 and 2005 hurricanes created great uncertainty in determining ultimate losses for these natural
catastrophes. Issues related to applicability of deductibles, availability and cost of repair
services and materials, and other factors have increased the variability in estimates of the
related loss reserves. UPCIC has experienced unanticipated unfavorable loss development on
catastrophe losses from claims related to 2004 and 2005 being reopened and new claims being opened
due to public adjusters encouraging policyholders to file new claims, and from assessments related
to condominium policies. Due to the inherent uncertainty, the parameters of the loss estimation
methodologies are updated on an annual basis as new information emerges.
32
Adequacy of Reserve Estimates. We believe our net loss and LAE reserves are appropriately
established based on available methodology, facts, technology, laws and regulations. We calculate
and record a single best reserve estimate, in conformance with generally accepted actuarial
standards, for reported losses and IBNR losses and as a result we believe no other estimate is
better than our recorded amount.
The Company has created a proprietary claims analysis tool (P2P) to analyze and calculate reserves.
P2P is a custom built application by UPCIC that aggregates, analyzes and forecasts reserves based
on historical data that spans more than a decade. It identifies historical claims data using same
like kind and quality variables that exist in present claims and sets forth appropriate, more
accurate reserves on current claims. P2P is reviewed by UPCIC management on a weekly basis in
reviewing the topography of existing and incoming claims. P2P will be analyzed at each quarters end
and adjustments to reserves are made at an aggregate level when appropriate.
P2P was initially used for 2010 third quarter reserve analysis resulting in an increase in 2010
loss year reserves. Further refinements were put into place in 2010 fourth quarter which included
inflation adjustments for past claims into 2010 dollars (inflation guard). P2P was reviewed by an
independent third party for data integrity and system reliability. The program was used for 2010
fourth quarter analysis and supported the companys independent actuarys best figures for
development in prior years. The system indicated reserves for the 2010 loss year that exceeded
actuarys best figures and system figures were used at year end. This program will be used for
quarterly reviews on an ongoing basis.
Due to the uncertainties involved, the scenarios described and quantified above are reasonably
likely, but the ultimate cost of losses may vary materially from recorded amounts, which are based
on our best estimates. The net reserve for unpaid losses and LAE at December 31, 2010 is
$79,814,419.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs/Deferred Ceding Commissions. Commissions and other costs of
acquiring insurance that vary with and are primarily related to the production of new and renewal
business are deferred and amortized over the terms of the policies or reinsurance treaties to which
they are related. Determination of costs other than commissions that vary with and are primarily
related to the production of new and renewal business requires estimates to allocate certain
operating expenses. As of December 31, 2010, deferred policy acquisition costs were $50,127,539 and
deferred ceding commissions were $40,681,860. Deferred policy acquisition costs were reduced by
deferred ceding commissions and shown net on the Consolidated Balance Sheet in the amount of
$9,445,679.
Provision for Premium Deficiency. It is the Companys policy to evaluate and recognize losses on
insurance contracts when estimated future claims and maintenance costs under a group of existing
contracts will exceed anticipated future premiums and investment income. The determination of the
provision for premium deficiency requires estimation of the costs of losses, catastrophic
reinsurance and policy maintenance to be incurred and investment income to be earned over the
remaining policy period. The Company has determined that a provision for premium deficiency was
not warranted as of December 31, 2010.
Reinsurance. In the normal course of business, the Company seeks to reduce the risk of loss that
may arise from catastrophes or other events that cause unfavorable underwriting results by
reinsuring certain levels of risk in various areas of exposure with other insurance enterprises or
reinsurers. While ceding premiums to reinsurers reduces the Companys risk of exposure in the
event of catastrophic losses, it also reduces the Companys potential for greater profits should
such catastrophic events fail to occur. The Company believes that the extent of its reinsurance is
typical of a company of its size in the homeowners insurance industry. Amounts recoverable from
reinsurers are estimated in a manner consistent with the provisions of the reinsurance agreement
and consistent with the establishment of the liability of the Company. UPCICs reinsurance policies
do not relieve the UPCPC from its obligations to policyholders. Failure of reinsurers to honor
their obligations could result in losses to the Company; consequently, allowances are established
for amounts deemed uncollectible. No such allowance was deemed necessary as of December 31, 2010.
New Accounting Pronouncements Issued But Not Yet Adopted
In September 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued amendments to
existing guidance on accounting for costs associated with acquiring or renewing insurance
contracts. The amendments modify the types of costs incurred by insurance entities that can be
capitalized in the acquisition of new and renewal insurance contracts. Under this guidance, these
deferred acquisition costs are varied and related to the acquisition of new and renewal insurance
contracts. Those costs include agent and broker commissions, salaries of certain employees involved
in underwriting and policy issuance, and medical and inspection fees. The amendments are effective
for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011. Therefore, the Company is
required to
33
adopt this guidance on January 1, 2012. The Company is currently evaluating the
requirements of the amendments and the potential impact, if any, on the Companys financial
position and results of operations.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
The Company had no off-balance sheet arrangements during 2010.
RELATED PARTIES
Downes and Associates, a multi-line insurance adjustment corporation based in Deerfield Beach,
Florida performs certain claims adjusting work for UPCIC. Downes and Associates is owned by Dennis
Downes, who is the father of Sean P. Downes, Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of
UPCIC. During 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company expensed claims adjusting fees of $480,000,
$605,000, and $410,000, respectively, to Downes and Associates.
During the fourth quarter of 2009, the Company overpaid non-equity incentive plan compensation
to the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer in the amounts of $217,169 and $162,876,
respectively. These amounts were repaid to the Company during February 2010.
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010 COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009
Net income was $36,983,762 for the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $28,787,298 for
the year ended December 31, 2009. The Companys earnings per diluted share were $0.92 for the 2010
period versus $0.71 in the same period last year. The following discussion provides comparative
information for each component of net income and comprehensive income for 2010 compared to 2009.
Direct premiums written increased 18.4% to $666,309,262 for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $562,671,620 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The year ended December 31, 2010, saw
continued growth in policy count for UPCIC, the Companys wholly-owned regulated insurance
subsidiary. The increase in the number of policies in-force continued to be the result of
strengthened relationships with existing agents, an increase in the number of new agents, and
continued expansion within Florida and in South Carolina, North Carolina, and Hawaii. As of
December 31, 2010 and 2009, UPCIC was servicing 583,878 and 541,001 homeowners and dwelling fire
insurance policies with in-force premiums of $667,105,596 and $567,081,204, respectively. The wind
mitigation discounts mandated by the Florida Legislature in 2007 continue to adversely affect
UPCICs premiums compared to historical rates. However, the rate of decrease in premiums due to the
wind mitigation discounts was less in 2010 than 2009.
Net premiums earned increased 20.3% to $170,442,897 for the year ended December 31, 2010, from
$141,653,725 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase is due to an increase in direct
premiums earned and a proportionally lower increase in ceded premiums earned related to changes in
the reinsurance program as described in Note 3 REINSURANCE in the accompanying notes to the
Companys consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8 below.
Insurers like UPCIC experience the impact of rate or discount changes up to 12 months after
they are implemented because the changes are effective as policies renew throughout the year.
Although insurers may seek to rectify any rate discrepancies through subsequent rate increase
filings with the OIR, there is no assurance that the OIR and the insurers will agree on the amount
of rate change that is needed. In addition, any adjustments to the insurers rates similarly take
up to 12 months to be fully integrated into the insurers business.
Net investment income decreased 31.7% to $992,235 for the year ended December 31, 2010 from
$1,453,599 for the year ended December 31, 2009. Net investment income is comprised primarily of
interest and dividends. The decrease is primarily due to a change in the composition of the
Companys investment portfolio during 2010.
Realized gains on investments increased to $27,691,623 for the year ended December 31, 2010
from $24,175,045 for the year ended December 31, 2009 due to sales of securities.
Unrealized gains on investments of $1,753,919 include a transfer of $656,307 of unrealized
losses upon the reclassification of the available-for-sale investment portfolio as a trading
portfolio effective July 1, 2010, unrealized
34
gains of $2,669,321 from trading securities during the
six-month period ended December 31, 2010, and unrealized losses of $259,095 on exchange traded
derivatives. Prior to July 1, 2010, the changes in unrealized gains and losses on the Companys
available-for-sale portfolio were appropriately included in Other Comprehensive Income rather than
current period income.
Foreign currency gains on investments decreased to $1,122,603 for the year ended December 31,
2010 from $6,808,419 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease is due to changes in the
composition of the Companys investment portfolio containing foreign-denominated securities.
Commission revenue increased 5.4% to $17,894,967 for the year ended December 31, 2010 from
$16,984,447 for the year ended December 31, 2009. Commission revenue is comprised principally of
reinsurance commission sharing agreements, and commissions generated from agency operations. The
increase is attributable to an increase in reinsurance commission sharing of approximately
$911,000.
Policy fees revenue increased 6.9% to $15,149,369 for the year ended December 31, 2010 from
$14,174,000 for the year ended December 31, 2009. Policy fee revenue is compromised principally of
the managing general agents policy fee income and service fee income from insurance policies. The
increase is primarily due to an increase in the number of policies to 583,879 at December 31, 2010
from 541,001 at December 31, 2009.
Other revenue decreased 9.6% to $4,875,618 for the year ended December 31, 2010 from
$5,392,894 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease is primarily due to a decrease in
finance charges paid by policy holders.
Net losses and LAE increased 6.8% to $113,355,475 for the year ended December 31, 2010 from
$106,133,135 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The net loss and LAE ratios, or net losses and
LAE as a percentage of net earned premiums, were 66.5% and 74.9% during the years ended December
31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and were comprised of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Direct |
|
|
Ceded |
|
|
Net |
|
Loss and loss adjustment
expenses |
|
$ |
229,044,188 |
|
|
$ |
115,688,713 |
|
|
$ |
113,355,475 |
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
616,345,258 |
|
|
$ |
445,902,361 |
|
|
$ |
170,442,897 |
|
Loss & LAE ratios |
|
|
37.2 |
% |
|
|
25.9 |
% |
|
|
66.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Direct |
|
|
Ceded |
|
|
Net |
|
Loss and loss adjustment
expenses |
|
$ |
214,981,546 |
|
|
$ |
108,848,411 |
|
|
$ |
106,133,135 |
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
542,790,538 |
|
|
$ |
401,136,813 |
|
|
$ |
141,653,725 |
|
Loss & LAE ratios |
|
|
39.6 |
% |
|
|
27.1 |
% |
|
|
74.9 |
% |
The direct loss and LAE ratio for the year ended December 31, 2010 was 37.2% compared to 39.6%
for the year ended December 31, 2009. The decrease in the direct loss and LAE ratio is
attributable to the increase in direct earned premium outpacing the increase in direct loss and LAE
incurred in the 2010 period.
Direct premiums earned increased 13.6% in the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to the
same period in 2009 as a result of an increase in the number of in-force policies and average
premiums on those policies. The average premium of in-force policies for 2010 increased 9.0% to
$1,143 compared to $1,048 for 2009 due to premium rate increases that went into effect during the
fourth quarter of 2009, partially offset by the increase in wind mitigation discounts in 2010
versus 2009.
The ceded loss and LAE ratio for the year ended December 31, 2010 was 25.9% compared to 27.1%
for the year ended December 31, 2009. The ceded loss and LAE ratio was influenced by greater
direct incurred loss and LAE ceded under the Companys quota share reinsurance treaty offset by
proportionately lower catastrophe premiums ceded to reinsurers in the 2010 period compared to the
2009 period.
Catastrophes are an inherent risk of the property-liability insurance business which may
contribute to material year-to-year fluctuations in UPCICs and the Companys results of operations
and financial position. During the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, the
Company did not experience any catastrophic events. The level of catastrophe loss experienced in
any year cannot be predicted and could be material to the results of operations and financial
position of UPCIC and the Company. While management believes
35
UPCICs and the Companys catastrophe
management strategies will reduce the severity of future losses, UPCIC and the Company continue to
be exposed to catastrophic losses, including catastrophic losses that may exceed the limits of the
Companys reinsurance program.
General and administrative expenses increased 10.2% to $64,289,954 for the year ended December
31, 2010 from $58,346,170 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The increase in general and
administrative expenses was due to several factors including an increase in direct commissions
in correlation with the increase in direct premiums written, partially offset by an increase in ceded
commissions paid, and an increase in state taxes on premiums directly related to the increase on written premiums.
Federal and state income taxes increased 45.6% to $25,294,041 for the year ended December 31,
2010 from $17,375,526 for the year ended December 31, 2009. Federal and state income taxes were
40.6% of pretax income for the year ended December 31, 2010, and 37.6% for the year ended December
31, 2009. The increase in the effective tax rate is due primarily to non-deductible compensation.
Net income increased 28.5% to $36,983,762 for the year ended December 31, 2010 from
$28,787,298 for the year ended December 31, 2009. The Companys earnings per diluted share were
$0.92 for the 2010 period versus $0.71 in the same period last year.
Comprehensive income increased 24.2% to $36,420,108 for year ended December 31, 2010 from
$29,326,118 for the year ended December 31, 2009 as a result of the $8,196,464 increase in net
income, offset by a decrease due to the change in net unrealized gains on investments, net of tax,
of $563,654. The change in net unrealized gains on investments is attributable to the
reclassification of net unrealized gains outstanding at December 31, 2009 to current period revenue
in connection with the reclassification of the Companys available-for-sale investment portfolio to
a trading securities portfolio during 2010.
YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2009 COMPARED TO YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2008
The Companys operating results in 2009 were adversely affected by broader conditions in the
Florida residential insurance market. The Florida Legislature expanded the reimbursement coverage
available from the Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund in 2007 causing residential insurers in
Florida to reduce rates based upon presumptive costs savings as calculated by the (OIR) and later
based upon a true-up filing using their own data. In 2007, the Florida Financial Services
Commission increased then-existing discounts available for homes built with certain windstorm loss
reduction devices. We believe these cumulative discounts result in premium reductions that are
greater than the estimated reductions in losses.
The Companys operating results in 2009 were also influenced by legislative enactments
relating to claims payments. Following the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons, the Florida
Legislature required all insurers issuing replacement cost policies to pay the full replacement
cost of damaged properties without deducting depreciation whether or not the insureds repaired or
replaced the damaged property. Under prior law, insurers would pay the depreciated amount of the
property until insureds commenced repairs or replacement. The new law has led to an increase in
disagreements regarding the scope of damage and has resulted in insureds not repairing damage.
Although UPCIC seeks to review diligently claims and promptly pay meritorious amounts, the
Companys operating results may be affected by a claims environment in Florida that produces
opportunities for fraudulent or overstated claims.
The year ended December 31, 2009 saw continued growth in policy count for UPCIC, the Companys
wholly-owned regulated insurance subsidiary. The increase in the number of policies in-force
continued to be the result of heightened relationships with existing agents, an increase in new
agents, a new web-based policy administration system, and the disruption in the marketplace
following the windstorm catastrophes in 2004 and 2005.
Despite growth in the number of policies in-force during the year ended December 31, 2009, the
Company experienced a decrease in net income in the current period primarily as a result of the
effects of state mandated rate reductions and discounts, and increased losses and loss adjustment
expenses incurred.
In January 2007, the Florida Legislature passed a law designed to reduce residential
catastrophe reinsurance costs and requiring insurance companies to offer corresponding rate
reductions to policyholders. The new law expanded the amount of reinsurance available from the
FHCF, which is a state-run entity providing hurricane reinsurance to residential insurers at
premiums less than the private reinsurance market. The Legislature intended for
36
the new law to reduce residential insurers reinsurance costs by allowing them to directly replace some of their
private market reinsurance with less costly FHCF reinsurance.
For the reinsurance contract years commencing June 1, 2007 and June 1, 2008, UPCIC purchased
the maximum additional coverage available to the Company under the expanded FHCF, allowing UPCIC to
maximize its cost savings from the new law. For the June 1, 2007 reinsurance contract year, UPCIC
elected to purchase Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund Recovery Shortfall Reinsurance (FHCF
Recovery Shortfall Reinsurance) in the event the FHCF could not fulfill its payment obligations
for the 2007-2008 Hurricane Season. For the June 1, 2008 reinsurance contract year, a similar FHCF
Recovery Shortfall Reinsurance product was unavailable in the marketplace. For the June 1, 2009
contract year UPCIC purchased the traditional FHCF coverage and did not purchase the Temporary
Increase in Coverage Limit Option offered to insurers by the FHCF. UPCICs decision to forego the
purchase of the Temporary Increase in Coverage Limit Option offered to insurers by the FHCF was
based on the FHCFs potential lack of loss reimbursement capacity. Prior to the June 1, 2009
reinsurance contract year, the Florida State Board of Administration (SBA) published its most
recent estimate of the FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity in the Florida Administrative Weekly on
May 29, 2009. The SBA estimated that the FHCFs total loss reimbursement capacity under the then
current market conditions for the 2009-2010 contract year was $15.830 billion over the 12 month
period following the estimate. The SBA also referred to its report, entitled, May 2009 Estimated
Loss Reimbursement Capacity (Report) as providing greater detail regarding the FHCFs loss
reimbursement capacity. The Report estimated that the FHCFs minimum 12-month loss reimbursement
capacity was $12.460 billion and its maximum 12-month loss reimbursement capacity was $17.960
billion. UPCICs FHCF Mandatory Layer of Coverage for the contract year commencing June 1, 2009,
corresponds to FHCF loss reimbursement capacity of $17.175 billion. Further, on October 30, 2009,
the Florida State Board of Administration (SBA) published its most recent estimate of the FHCFs
loss reimbursement capacity in the Florida Administrative Weekly. The SBA estimated that the
FHCFs total loss reimbursement capacity under current market conditions for the 2009 2010
contract year is projected to be $18.998 billion over the 12-month period following the estimate.
The SBA also referred to its report entitled, October 2009 Estimated Claims Paying Capacity
Report (Report) as providing greater detail regarding the FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity.
The Report estimated that the FHCFs minimum 12-month loss reimbursement capacity is $14.998
billion and its maximum 12-month loss reimbursement capacity is $21.998 billion.
By law, the FHCFs obligation to reimburse insurers is limited to its actual claims-paying
capacity. In addition, the cost of UPCICs reinsurance program may increase should UPCIC deem it
necessary to purchase additional private market reinsurance due to reduced estimates of the FHCFs
loss reimbursement capacity.
Floridas Legislature also has implemented strategies to improve the ability of residential
structures to withstand hurricanes. New construction must meet stronger building codes, and
existing homes are eligible for an inspection program that allows homeowners to determine how their
homes may be upgraded to mitigate storm damage. An increasing number of insureds are likely to
qualify for insurance premium discounts as new homes are built and existing homes are retrofitted.
These premium discounts result from homes reduced vulnerability to hurricane losses due to the
mitigation efforts, which UPCIC takes into account in its underwriting and profitability models.
Net income decreased 28.1% to $28,787,298 for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$40,037,323 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The Companys earnings per diluted share were
$0.71 for the 2009 period versus $0.99 in the same period last year.
Comprehensive income decreased 26.8% to $29,326,118 for year ended December 31, 2009 from
$40,062,157 for the year ended December 31, 2008 as a result of the aforementioned decrease in net
income and an increase in the change in net unrealized gains on investments, net of tax, of
$538,820 that comprises an increase in net unrealized gains of $877,201, net of taxes of $338,380.
The change in net unrealized gains on investments, net of tax, relate to market value fluctuations
within the Companys investment portfolio during the year ended December 31, 2009. The Company had
net realized gains on investments of $24,175,405 during the year ended December 31, 2009. The
Company had no realized gains on investments and had unrealized gains on investments of $40,429
during the year-ended December 31, 2008.
Direct premiums written increased 10.0% to $562,671,620 for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $511,369,676 for the year ended December 31, 2008. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, UPCIC was
servicing approximately 541,000 and 461,000, respectively, homeowners and dwelling fire insurance
policies with in-force premiums of approximately $567,100,000 and $518,200,000, respectively. The
wind mitigation discounts mandated by the Florida Legislature to be effective June 1, 2007 for new
business and August 1, 2007 for renewal business have had a significant adverse effect on UPCICs
premium. As of June 1, 2007, 1.9% of UPCIC policyholders were
37
receiving wind mitigation credits
totaling $6,284,697 (a 1.3% reduction of in force premium). As of 12/31/07, 11.8% of UPCIC
policyholders were receiving wind mitigation credits totaling $31,951,623 (a 6.0% reduction of in
force premium). As of 12/31/08, 31.1% of UPCIC policyholders were receiving wind mitigation
credits totaling $123,524,911 (a 19.4% reduction of in force premium). As of 12/31/09, 45.2% of
UPCIC policyholders were receiving wind mitigation credits totaling $219,974,130 (a 28.3% reduction
of in force premium).
Net premiums earned decreased 3.9% to $141,653,725 for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$147,413,697 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease is due to an increase in direct
premiums earned (net of previously discussed rate decreases and implementation of wind mitigation
credits) and a proportionally higher increase in ceded premiums earned related to changes in the
reinsurance program as described in Note 3 REINSURANCE in the accompanying notes to the
Companys consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8 below. The higher volume of
state-required wind mitigation premium discounts had a significant negative effect on the Companys
premium volume and net income.
On October 19, 2009, UPCIC received approval for a premium rate increase for its homeowners
program within the State of Florida. The premium rate increase, which will average approximately
14.6 percent statewide, was approved by the OIR. The effective dates for the premium rate increase
are October 22, 2009 for new business and December 11, 2009 for renewal business. UPCIC expects
the approved premium rate increases to have a favorable effect on premiums written and earned in
future months as new and renewal policies are written at the higher rates.
On November 3, 2009, UPCIC received approval for a premium rate increase for its dwelling fire
program within the State of Florida. The premium rate increase, which will average approximately
14.8 percent statewide, was approved by the OIR. The effective dates for the premium rate increase
are November 5, 2009 for new business and December 29, 2009 for renewal business. UPCIC expects
the approved premium rate increases to have a favorable effect on premiums written and earned in
future months as new and renewal policies are written at the higher rates.
Insurers like UPCIC fully experience the impact of rate or discount changes more than 12
months after they are implemented because their policies renew throughout the year. Although
insurers may seek to rectify any problems through subsequent rate increase filings with the OIR,
there is no assurance that the OIR and the insurers will agree on the amount of rate change that is
needed. In addition, any adjustments to the insurers rates similarly take more than 12 months to
be fully integrated into the insurers business.
Net investment income decreased 60.9% to $1,453,599 for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$3,721,029 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The decrease is primarily due to a lower interest
rate environment during the year ended December 31, 2009.
Realized gains on investments increased to $24,175,045 for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $0 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase is due to the expansion of the
Companys investment portfolio into fixed maturities and equity securities and the related sales of
certain of these securities.
Foreign currency gains on investments increased to $6,808,419 for the year ended December 31,
2009 from $0 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase is due to the expansion of the
Companys investment portfolio into foreign-denominated fixed maturities and equity securities and
the related sales of certain of these securities.
Commission revenue increased 16.1% to $16,984,447 for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$14,426,773 for the year ended December 31, 2008. Commission revenue is comprised principally of
reinsurance commission sharing agreements, and commissions generated from agency operations. The
increase is attributable to an increase in reinsurance commission sharing of approximately $2.4
million.
Policy fees revenue increased 16.3% to $14,174,000 for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$12,188,345 for the year ended December 31, 2008. Policy fee revenue is compromised principally of
the managing general agents policy fee income and service fee income on all new and renewal
insurance policies. The increase is primarily due to an increase in the number of policies to
541,001 at December 31, 2009 from 461,000 at December 31, 2008.
Other revenue increased 14.3% to $5,392,894 for the year ended December 31, 2009 from
$4,717,492 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase is primarily due to fees earned on
payment plans offered to policyholders by UPCIC.
38
Net losses and LAE increased 30.5% to $106,133,135 for the year ended December 31, 2009
from $81,338,126 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The net loss and LAE ratios, or net losses
and LAE as a percentage of net earned premiums, were 74.9% and 55.2% during the years ended
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, and were comprised of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Direct |
|
|
Ceded |
|
|
Net |
|
Loss and loss adjustment
expenses |
|
$ |
214,981,546 |
|
|
$ |
108,848,411 |
|
|
$ |
106,133,135 |
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
542,790,538 |
|
|
$ |
401,136,813 |
|
|
$ |
141,653,725 |
|
Loss & LAE ratios |
|
|
39.6 |
% |
|
|
27.1 |
% |
|
|
74.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Direct |
|
|
Ceded |
|
|
Net |
|
Loss and loss adjustment
expenses |
|
$ |
160,615,643 |
|
|
$ |
79,277,517 |
|
|
$ |
81,338,126 |
|
Premiums earned |
|
$ |
507,621,388 |
|
|
$ |
360,207,691 |
|
|
$ |
147,413,697 |
|
Loss & LAE ratios |
|
|
31.6 |
% |
|
|
22.0 |
% |
|
|
55.2 |
% |
The direct loss and LAE ratio for the year ended December 31, 2009 was 39.6% compared to 31.6%
for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase in the direct loss and LAE ratio is
attributable to the increase in direct loss and LAE incurred outpacing the increase in direct
earned premium in the 2009 period.
Although total direct premiums earned increased 6.9% in the year ended December 31, 2009
compared to the same period in 2008, the average premium per policy decreased significantly due to
the previously described rate decreases and wind mitigation credits. As of December 31, 2009,
UPCIC was servicing approximately 541,000 homeowners and dwelling fire insurance policies with
in-force premiums of approximately $567,100,000, or an average of $1,048 per policy. The
comparable average in-force premium per policy as of December 31, 2008 was $1,125. Consequently,
the direct loss and LAE ratio increased for the 2009 period. However, except for direct incurred
losses and LAE of approximately $11.9 million, or 2.2% of direct earned premium, related to
Tropical Storm Fay in 2008, the Companys loss experience did not vary significantly during the
2009 year compared to the 2008 year. Direct incurred losses and LAE related to Tropical Storm Fay
were ceded to UPCICs quota share reinsurer at 50%, or $5,950,000.
The ceded loss and LAE ratio for the year ended December 31, 2009 was 27.1% compared to 22.0%
for the year ended December 31, 2008. The ceded loss and LAE ratio was influenced by greater
direct incurred loss and LAE ceded under the Companys quota share reinsurance treaty and higher
catastrophe premiums ceded to reinsurers in the 2009 period compared to the 2008 period.
Catastrophes are an inherent risk of the property-liability insurance business which may
contribute to material year-to-year fluctuations in UPCICs and the Companys results of operations
and financial position. During the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, neither
UPCIC nor the Company experienced any catastrophic events. The level of catastrophe loss
experienced in any year cannot be predicted and could be material to the results of operations and
financial position of UPCIC and the Company. While management believes UPCICs and the Companys
catastrophe management strategies will reduce the severity of future losses, UPCIC and the Company
continue to be exposed to catastrophic losses, including catastrophic losses that may exceed the
limits of the Companys reinsurance program.
General and administrative expenses increased 65.2% to $58,346,170 for the year ended December 31,
2009 from $35,322,405 for the year ended December 31, 2008. The increase in general and
administrative expenses was due to several factors. Direct commissions paid increased in
correlation with the increase in direct premiums written. In addition, state taxes on premiums
were affected by the increase in written premiums. Salaries increased for existing employees and
higher employee count due to business growth. Also, ceding commissions decreased as a result of
the quota share reinsurance commission rate reduction associated with the 2009 2010 contract year
quota share reinsurance contract. Deferred policy acquisition costs were also affected by this
rate reduction. Assessment expenses increased due to a FIGA assessment of approximately $4.1
million during 2009.
39
Federal and state income taxes decreased 33.1% to $17,375,526 for the year ended December 31,
2009 from $25,969,442 for the year ended December 31, 2008. Federal and state income taxes were
37.6% of pretax income for the year ended December 31, 2009, and 39.3% for the year ended December
31, 2008. The decrease is primarily due to lower income before income taxes.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Liquidity
Liquidity is a measure of a companys ability to generate sufficient cash flows to meet its
short and long -term obligations.
The balance of cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2010 was $147.6 million. Most of
this amount is available to pay claims in the event of a catastrophic event pending reimbursement
amounts recoverable under reinsurance agreements.
UIHs liquidity requirements primarily include the payment of dividends to shareholders and
interest and principal on debt obligations. The declaration and payment of future dividends to
shareholders will be at the discretion of the Companys Board of Directors and will depend upon
many factors, including the Companys operating results, financial condition, capital requirements
and any regulatory constraints.
The maximum amount of dividends, which can be paid by Florida insurance companies without
prior approval of the Commissioner of the OIR, is subject to restrictions relating to statutory
surplus. The maximum dividend that may be paid by UPCIC to the UIH without prior approval is
limited to the lesser of statutory net income from operations of the preceding calendar year or
statutory unassigned surplus as of the preceding year end. During the years ended December 31,
2010 and 2009, UPCIC did not pay dividends to UIH. During 2010, UIH contributed $30 million to
UPCIC in the form of a capital contribution.
The Companys insurance operations provide liquidity in that premiums are generally received
months or even years before losses are paid under the policies sold by the Company. Historically,
cash receipts from operations, consisting of insurance premiums, commissions, policy fees and
investment income, have provided more than sufficient funds to pay loss claims and operating
expenses. The Company maintains substantial investments in highly liquid, marketable securities.
Liquidity can also be generated by funds received upon the sale of marketable securities in the
Companys investment portfolio.
Effective July 1, 2010, the Company elected to classify its securities investment portfolio as
trading. Accordingly, purchases and sales of investment securities are included in cash flows from
operations beginning July 1, 2010. The Company used $9.2 million in cash to fund operations during
the year ended December 31, 2010 compared to $37.3 million and $50.3 million of cash generated by
operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008. The use of cash during the
year ended December 2010 reflects purchases of investment securities, net of proceeds from sales,
of $68.7 million since July 1, 2010.
UPCIC is responsible for losses related to catastrophic events with incurred losses in excess
of coverage provided by UPCICs reinsurance programs and for losses that otherwise are not covered
by the reinsurance programs, which could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the
Companys business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity (see Note 3 to the
Companys Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K for a discussion
of the Companys reinsurance programs). UPCIC obtained coverage from the FHCF, which is
administered by the SBA. On October 29, 2010, the SBA published its most recent estimate of the
FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity in the Florida Administrative Weekly. The SBA estimated that
the FHCFs total claims-paying capacity under current market conditions for the 2010 2011
contract year is projected to be $18.776 billion over the 12-month period following the estimate.
The SBA also referred to its report entitled, October 2010 Estimated Claims Paying Capacity
Report (Report) as providing greater detail regarding the FHCFs claims-paying capacity. The
Report estimated that the FHCFs minimum 12-month claims-paying capacity is $19.414 billion and its
maximum 12-month claims-paying capacity is $35.414 billion with an average claims-paying capacity
of $25.414 billion. This projected claims-paying capacity exceeds the FHCFs maximum statutory
obligation for 2010 of $18.776 billion. Claims-paying capacity exceeding the FHCFs maximum
statutory obligation for a single contract year may be available for insurer reimbursements in
future contract years. UPCIC purchased the FHCF Mandatory Layer of Coverage for the 2010 2011
contract year, which corresponds to FHCF loss reimbursement capacity of $17 billion. Fortunately,
no hurricanes made landfall in Florida during the 2010-2011 contract year and no reimbursement
payments for the 2010-2011 contract year were required from the FHCF
40
to participating companies.
Accordingly, the effect of the change in the FHCFs estimate had no effect on the Companys
financial position, results of operations and liquidity.
Funds from operations generated by the Company have generally been sufficient to meet
liquidity requirements and we expect that in the future funds from operations will continue to meet
such requirements.
Capital Resources
Capital resources provide protection for policyholders, furnish the financial strength to
support the business of underwriting insurance risks and facilitate continued business growth. At
December 31, 2010, the Company had total capital of $162,951,392 comprised of shareholders equity
of $139,789,628 and total debt of $23,161,764. The Companys debt to total capital ratio and debt
to equity ratio were 14.2% and 16.6%, respectively, at December 31, 2010.
UPCIC is required annually to comply with the NAIC Risk-Based Capital (RBC) requirements.
RBC requirements prescribe a method of measuring the amount of capital appropriate for an insurance
company to support its overall business operations in light of its size and risk profile. NAICs
RBC requirements are used by regulators to determine appropriate regulatory actions relating to
insurers who show signs of weak or deteriorating condition. As of December 31, 2010, based on
calculations using the appropriate NAIC RBC formula, UPCICs reported total adjusted capital was in
excess of the requirements. Failure by UPCIC to maintain the required level of statutory capital
and surplus could result in the suspension of UPCICs authority to write new or renewal business,
other regulatory actions or ultimately, in the revocation of UPCICs certificate of authority by
the OIR.
On November 9, 2006, UPCIC entered into a $25.0 million surplus note with the Florida State
Board of Administration (SBA) under Floridas Insurance Capital Build-Up Incentive Program
(ICBUI). The surplus note has a twenty-year term and accrues interest, adjusted quarterly based
on the 10-year Constant Maturity Treasury Index. For the first three years of the term of the
surplus note, UPCIC was required to pay interest only.
In May 2008, the Florida Legislature passed a law providing participants in the ICBUI an
opportunity to amend the terms of their surplus notes based on law changes. The new law contains
methods for calculating compliance with the writing ratio requirements that are more favorable to
UPCIC than prior law and the prior terms of the surplus note. On November 6, 2008, UPCIC and the
SBA executed an addendum to the surplus note (Addendum) that reflects these law changes. The
terms of the addendum were effective July 1, 2008. In addition to other less significant changes,
the Addendum modifies the definitions of Minimum Required Surplus, Minimum Writing Ratio,
Surplus, and Gross Written Premium, as defined in the original surplus note.
Prior to the execution of the addendum, UPCIC was in compliance with each of the loans
covenants as implemented by rules promulgated by the SBA. UPCIC currently remains in compliance
with each of the loans covenants as implemented by rules promulgated by the SBA. An event of
default will occur under the surplus note, as amended, if UPCIC: (i) defaults in the payment of the
surplus note; (ii) drops below a net written premium to surplus of 1:1 for three consecutive
quarters beginning January 1, 2010 and drops below a gross written premium to surplus ratio of 3:1
for three consecutive quarters beginning January 1, 2010; (iii) fails to submit quarterly filings
to the OIR; (iv) fails to maintain at least $50 million of surplus during the term of the surplus
note, except for certain situations; (v) misuses proceeds of the surplus note; (vi) makes any
misrepresentations in the application for the program; (vii) pays any dividend when principal or
interest payments are past due under the surplus note; or (viii) fails to maintain a level of
surplus sufficient to cover in excess of UPCICs 1-in-100 year probable maximum loss as determined
by a hurricane loss model accepted by the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection
Methodology as certified by the OIR annually.
As of December 31, 2010, UPCICs net written premium to surplus ratio and gross written
premium to surplus ratio were in excess of the required minimums and, therefore, UPCIC is not
subject to increases in interest rates.
On June 25, 2008, the Companys Board of Directors authorized the Company to repurchase up to
$3,000,000 of its shares of outstanding Common Stock. Under the repurchase program, management was
authorized to repurchase shares through December 31, 2008, with block trades permitted, in open
market purchases or in privately negotiated transactions at prevailing market prices in compliance
with applicable securities laws and other legal requirements. To facilitate repurchases, the
Company made purchases pursuant to a Rule 10b5-1 plan, which allowed the Company to repurchase its
shares during periods when it otherwise might have been prevented from doing so under insider
trading laws. In total, the Company repurchased 808,900 shares under its repurchase plan at
41
an
aggregate cost of $2,999,788. On August 26, 2008, the Company announced the completion of the
repurchase program.
Ratings
UPCICs financial strength is rated by a rating agency to measure UPCICs ability to meet its
financial obligations to its policyholders. The agency maintains a letter scale financial stability
rating system ranging from Á (A double prime) to L (licensed by state regulatory authorities).
On December 1, 2010, the agency affirmed UPCICs financial stability rating of A, which is the
third highest of six rating levels. According to the agency, A ratings are assigned to insurers
that have ... exceptional ability to maintain liquidity of invested assets, quality reinsurance,
acceptable financial leverage and realistic pricing while simultaneously establishing loss and loss
adjustment expense reserves at reasonable levels. The rating of UPCIC is subject to at least
annual review by, and may be revised downward or revoked at the sole discretion of the agency.
Ratings are an important factor in establishing our competitive position in the insurance
markets. There can be no assurance that our ratings will continue for any given period of time or
that they will not be changed. A downgrade in our financial strength ratings could adversely affect
the competitive position of our insurance operations, including a possible reduction in demand for
our products in certain markets.
Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
The following table represents the Companys total contractual obligations for which cash flows are
fixed or determinable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
($ in thousands) |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Less than 1 year |
|
|
1-3 years |
|
|
4-5 years |
|
|
Over 5 years |
|
Unpaid losses and LAE, direct |
|
$ |
158,929 |
|
|
$ |
125,554 |
|
|
$ |
20,661 |
|
|
$ |
11,125 |
|
|
$ |
1,589 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
27,977 |
|
|
|
1,541 |
|
|
|
4,007 |
|
|
|
3,858 |
|
|
|
18,571 |
|
Operating leases |
|
|
1,569 |
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
292 |
|
|
|
|
|
Employment Agreements (1) |
|
|
34,882 |
|
|
|
10,386 |
|
|
|
23,978 |
|
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual obligations |
|
$ |
223,357 |
|
|
$ |
138,016 |
|
|
$ |
49,388 |
|
|
$ |
15,803 |
|
|
$ |
20,160 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The Company has entered into employment agreements with certain employees which are
in effect as of December 31, 2010. The agreements provide for minimum salaries, which
may be subject to annual percentage increases, and non-equity incentive compensation
for certain executives based on pre-tax or net income levels attained by the Company. |
The Company does not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that are reasonably likely
to have a material effect on the Companys financial condition, results of operations, liquidity or
capital resources, other than as disclosed in Note (16) of the Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements.
IMPACT OF INFLATION AND CHANGING PRICES
The consolidated financial statements and related data presented herein have been prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles which require the measurement of financial
position and operating results in terms of historical dollars without considering changes in the
relative purchasing power of money over time due to inflation. The primary assets of the Company
are monetary in nature. As a result, interest rates have a more significant impact on the Companys
performance than the effects of the general levels of inflation. Interest rates do not necessarily
move in the same direction or with the same magnitude as the cost of paying losses and LAE.
Insurance premiums are established before the Company knows the amount of loss and LAE and the
extent to which inflation may affect such expenses. Consequently, the Company attempts to
anticipate the future impact of inflation when establishing rate levels. While the Company attempts
to charge adequate rates, the Company may be limited in raising its premium levels for competitive
and regulatory reasons. Inflation also affects the market value of the Companys investment
portfolio and the investment rate of return. Any future economic changes which result
42
in prolonged
and increasing levels of inflation could cause increases in the dollar amount of incurred loss and
LAE and thereby materially adversely affect future liability requirements.
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Market risk is the potential for economic losses due to adverse changes in fair value of
financial instruments. Our primary market risk exposures are related to our investment portfolio
and include interest rates, equity prices and commodity prices, and to a lesser extent, the
Companys debt obligations. Investments in debt and equity securities held in trading and
available- for- sale portfolios are carried on the balance sheet at fair value. The Companys
investment portfolio as of December 31, 2010 was comprised approximately of 57% fixed income
securities and 43% equity securities, all of which were held for trading. The Companys investment
portfolio as of December 31, 2009 was comprised of approximately 36% fixed income securities and
64% equity securities, all of which were available for sale. As previously described in Liquidity
and Capital Resources, the Companys surplus note accrues interest at an adjustable rate based on
the 10-year Constant Maturity Treasury rate.
The Companys investment objective is to maximize total rate of return after federal income
taxes while maintaining liquidity and minimizing risk. The Companys investment portfolio is
managed by an investment committee consisting of all current directors in accordance with
guidelines established by the Florida OIR. The committee reviews the Companys investment policies
on a regular basis. The Companys current investment policy limits investment in non-investment
grade fixed maturity securities (including high-yield bonds), and limits total investments in
preferred stock and Common Stock. The Company complies with applicable laws and regulations, which
further restrict the type, quality and concentration of investments. In general, these laws and
regulations permit investments, within specified limits and subject to certain qualifications, in
federal, state and municipal obligations, corporate bonds, preferred and common equity securities
and real estate mortgages.
Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk is the sensitivity of a fixed rate instrument to changes in interest rates.
When interest rates rise, the fair value of our fixed- rate instruments decline.
The following table provides information about our fixed income investments, which are
sensitive to changes in interest rates. The table presents cash flows of principal amounts and
related weighted average interest rates by expected maturity dates for investments held in trading
at December 31, 2010 and available for sale at December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010 (Trading) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
2014 |
|
|
2015 |
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
US government and agency obligations |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
173,933 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
137,792,085 |
|
|
$ |
137,966,018 |
|
|
$ |
130,116,007 |
|
average interest rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2009 (Available for sale) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
2014 |
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
Amortized Cost |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
US government and agency obligations |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
176,350 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
42,120,377 |
|
|
$ |
42,296,727 |
|
|
$ |
41,389,008 |
|
average interest rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
2.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.8 |
% |
|
|
4.4 |
% |
|
|
4.4 |
% |
United States government and agency securities are rated from AAA to Aaa by Moodys Investors
Service, Inc. and AAA by Standard and Poors Company.
Equity and Commodity Price Risk
Equity and commodity price risk is the potential for loss in fair value of investments in
Common Stock, exchange traded funds (ETF), and mutual funds from adverse changes in the prices of
those instruments.
43
The following table provides information about the composition of equity and commodity
securities held in the Companys investment portfolio outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 (Trading) |
|
|
December 31, 2009 (Available for Sale) |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Percent of Total |
|
Common stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
25,751,909 |
|
|
|
27.3 |
% |
|
|
7,597,419 |
|
|
|
10.3 |
% |
Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
256,053 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
Other |
|
|
362,520 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
221,760 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
Exchange-traded and mutual
funds: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
42,209,279 |
|
|
|
44.7 |
% |
|
|
38,753,742 |
|
|
|
52.8 |
% |
Agriculture |
|
|
14,876,584 |
|
|
|
15.8 |
% |
|
|
11,754,630 |
|
|
|
16.0 |
% |
Energy |
|
|
5,559,296 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
% |
|
|
3,306,815 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
% |
Indices |
|
|
4,613,105 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
% |
|
|
7,963,094 |
|
|
|
10.8 |
% |
Other |
|
|
1,043,704 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
3,554,489 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equities securities |
|
$ |
94,416,397 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
73,408,002 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A hypothetical decrease of 10% in the market prices of each of the equity and commodity
securities held at December 31, 2010 and 2009, would have resulted in a decrease of $9,441,640 and
$7,340,800, respectively, in the fair value of the equity securities portfolio.
44
Item 8. Financial Statements and supplementary data
45
Report of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting Firm
Board of Directors
Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc.
Fort Lauderdale, Florida
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc.
and Subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated
statements of income, stockholders equity and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2010. We also have audited the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO). The Companys management is responsible for these consolidated financial
statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements and an opinion on the Companys
internal control over financial reporting based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and
whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining
an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material
weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal
control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis
for our opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the
supervision of, the companys principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons
performing similar functions, and effected by the companys board of directors, management, and
other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles. A companys internal control over financial reporting includes
those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles,
and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance
regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including the
possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material misstatements due to
error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Also, projections of any
evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting to future periods
are subject to the risk that the controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. and Subsidiaries as
of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion, the Company
maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2010, based on the criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
/s/ Blackman Kallick LLP
Chicago, Illinois
March 31, 2011
46
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
Investment securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading securities, at fair value (amortized cost -
$222,519,390 in 2010 and $0 in 2009) |
|
|
224,532,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities, at fair value (amortized cost
- $0 in 2010 and $113,832,760 in 2009) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
114,797,010 |
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums |
|
|
221,085,933 |
|
|
|
200,294,241 |
|
Reinsurance recoverables |
|
|
79,551,875 |
|
|
|
91,816,433 |
|
Premiums receivable, net |
|
|
43,622,606 |
|
|
|
37,363,110 |
|
Receivable from securities |
|
|
17,555,961 |
|
|
|
6,259,973 |
|
Other receivables |
|
|
2,863,757 |
|
|
|
5,068,367 |
|
Income taxes recoverable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,211,874 |
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
5,406,766 |
|
|
|
4,535,751 |
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs, net |
|
|
9,445,679 |
|
|
|
9,464,624 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
13,447,953 |
|
|
|
11,894,289 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
1,131,842 |
|
|
|
617,337 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
766,230,240 |
|
|
$ |
678,247,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
$ |
158,928,837 |
|
|
$ |
127,197,753 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
328,334,547 |
|
|
|
278,370,544 |
|
Advance premium |
|
|
19,839,740 |
|
|
|
17,078,558 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
3,767,293 |
|
|
|
3,172,626 |
|
Bank overdraft |
|
|
23,030,315 |
|
|
|
20,297,061 |
|
Reinsurance payable, net |
|
|
37,946,484 |
|
|
|
73,104,595 |
|
Income taxes payable |
|
|
8,282,030 |
|
|
|
368,968 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
23,149,602 |
|
|
|
20,750,385 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
23,161,764 |
|
|
|
24,632,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
626,440,612 |
|
|
|
564,972,843 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contigencies (Note 16) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative convertible preferred stock, $.01 par value |
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
1,087 |
|
Authorized shares - 1,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued shares - 107,690 and 108,640 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding shares - 107,690 and 108,640 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimum liquidation preference $287,240 and $288,190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $.01 par value |
|
|
404,069 |
|
|
|
402,146 |
|
Authorized shares - 55,000,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued shares - 40,406,751 and 40,214,884 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding shares - 39,387,998 and 37,774,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury shares, at cost - 1,018,753 and 1,809,119 shares |
|
|
(3,109,255 |
) |
|
|
(7,948,606 |
) |
Common stock held in trust, at cost - 0 and 631,000 shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(511,110 |
) |
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
33,674,697 |
|
|
|
36,666,914 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
563,654 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
108,819,040 |
|
|
|
84,100,372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
139,789,628 |
|
|
|
113,274,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
766,230,240 |
|
|
$ |
678,247,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these statements.
47
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
PREMIUMS EARNED AND OTHER REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Direct premiums written |
|
$ |
666,309,262 |
|
|
$ |
562,671,620 |
|
|
$ |
511,369,676 |
|
Ceded premiums written |
|
|
(466,694,053 |
) |
|
|
(428,384,278 |
) |
|
|
(360,581,696 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net premiums written |
|
|
199,615,209 |
|
|
|
134,287,342 |
|
|
|
150,787,980 |
|
(Increase) decrease in net unearned premium |
|
|
(29,172,312 |
) |
|
|
7,366,383 |
|
|
|
(3,374,283 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premiums earned, net |
|
|
170,442,897 |
|
|
|
141,653,725 |
|
|
|
147,413,697 |
|
Net investment income |
|
|
992,235 |
|
|
|
1,453,599 |
|
|
|
3,721,029 |
|
Net realized gains on investments |
|
|
27,691,623 |
|
|
|
24,175,045 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on investments |
|
|
1,753,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net foreign currency gains on investments |
|
|
1,122,603 |
|
|
|
6,808,419 |
|
|
|
|
|
Commission revenue |
|
|
17,894,967 |
|
|
|
16,984,447 |
|
|
|
14,626,733 |
|
Policy Fees |
|
|
15,149,369 |
|
|
|
14,174,000 |
|
|
|
12,188,345 |
|
Other revenue |
|
|
4,875,619 |
|
|
|
5,392,894 |
|
|
|
4,717,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total premiums earned and other revenues |
|
|
239,923,232 |
|
|
|
210,642,129 |
|
|
|
182,667,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING COSTS AND EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
113,355,475 |
|
|
|
106,133,135 |
|
|
|
81,338,126 |
|
General and administrative expenses |
|
|
64,289,954 |
|
|
|
58,346,170 |
|
|
|
35,322,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating costs and expenses |
|
|
177,645,429 |
|
|
|
164,479,305 |
|
|
|
116,660,531 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES |
|
|
62,277,803 |
|
|
|
46,162,824 |
|
|
|
66,006,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes, current |
|
|
26,854,322 |
|
|
|
15,494,732 |
|
|
|
25,895,545 |
|
Income taxes, deferred |
|
|
(1,560,281 |
) |
|
|
1,880,794 |
|
|
|
73,897 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes, net |
|
|
25,294,041 |
|
|
|
17,375,526 |
|
|
|
25,969,442 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME |
|
$ |
36,983,762 |
|
|
$ |
28,787,298 |
|
|
$ |
40,037,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income per common share |
|
$ |
0.95 |
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
$ |
1.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average of common shares
outstanding Basic |
|
|
39,113,302 |
|
|
|
37,617,885 |
|
|
|
37,418,253 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fully diluted net income per share |
|
$ |
0.92 |
|
|
$ |
0.71 |
|
|
$ |
0.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average of common shares
outstanding Diluted |
|
|
40,249,677 |
|
|
|
40,471,524 |
|
|
|
40,274,507 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividend declared per common share |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
0.54 |
|
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Comprehensive Income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
36,983,762 |
|
|
$ |
28,787,298 |
|
|
$ |
40,037,323 |
|
Change in net unrealized gains on
investments, net of tax |
|
|
(563,654 |
) |
|
|
538,820 |
|
|
|
24,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive Income |
|
$ |
36,420,108 |
|
|
$ |
29,326,118 |
|
|
$ |
40,062,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements are an integral part of these statements.
48
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
SGT |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Paid-In |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Common |
|
|
Treasury |
|
|
Stockholders' |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
Balance, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
40,214,884 |
|
|
|
108,640 |
|
|
$ |
402,146 |
|
|
$ |
1,087 |
|
|
$ |
36,666,914 |
|
|
$ |
84,100,372 |
|
|
$ |
563,654 |
|
|
$ |
(511,110 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,948,606 |
) |
|
$ |
113,274,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option exercises |
|
|
1,995,206 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,934,935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
511,110 |
|
|
|
(7,878,150 |
) |
|
|
(4,412,153 |
) |
Restricted stock
awards |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock
conversion |
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
(950 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement of
treasury shares |
|
|
(2,104,526 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(21,041 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,696,460 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,717,501 |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,108,705 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,108,705 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,983,762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,983,762 |
|
Excess tax benefit on
exercise of stock
options and vesting
of restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,099,145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,099,145 |
|
Prior year adjustment
tax benefit on
exercise of stock
options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(288,232 |
) |
|
|
288,232 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of
deferred compensation
in connection with
restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
852,692 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
852,692 |
|
Declaration of
dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,553,326 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,553,326 |
) |
Reclassification of
investments to
trading portfolio-net
of tax effect of $253,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
403,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
403,137 |
|
Change in net
unrealized gains on
investments-net of
tax effect of $603,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(966,791 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(966,791 |
) |
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
40,406,751 |
|
|
|
107,690 |
|
|
$ |
404,069 |
|
|
$ |
1,077 |
|
|
$ |
33,674,697 |
|
|
$ |
108,819,040 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,109,255 |
) |
|
$ |
139,789,628 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
49
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Additional |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Paid-In |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Stock Held in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders' |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Trust |
|
|
Treasury Stock |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
40,158,019 |
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
|
$ |
401,578 |
|
|
$ |
1,387 |
|
|
$ |
33,587,414 |
|
|
$ |
75,654,070 |
|
|
$ |
24,834 |
|
|
$ |
(733,860 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,381,768 |
) |
|
$ |
101,553,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option exercises |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
365,050 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222,750 |
|
|
|
(756,375 |
) |
|
|
(168,375 |
) |
Preferred stock conversion |
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
(30,000 |
) |
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
(300 |
) |
|
|
(450 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirement of treasury shares |
|
|
(38,135 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(189,155 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
189,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,520,647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,520,647 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,787,298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,787,298 |
|
Excess tax benefit on exercise
of stock
options and vesting of
restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
728,584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
728,584 |
|
Amortization of deferred
compensation in
connection with restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
654,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
654,824 |
|
Declaration of dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,340,996 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,340,996 |
) |
Net unrealized gains on
investments, net of
tax effect of $353,976 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
538,820 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
538,820 |
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
40,214,884 |
|
|
|
108,640 |
|
|
$ |
402,146 |
|
|
$ |
1,087 |
|
|
$ |
36,666,914 |
|
|
$ |
84,100,372 |
|
|
$ |
563,654 |
|
|
$ |
(511,110 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,948,606 |
) |
|
$ |
113,274,457 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
50
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
Preferred |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Stock |
|
|
Additional Paid- |
|
|
Retained |
|
|
Comprehensive |
|
|
Stock Held in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders' |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
In Capital |
|
|
Earnings |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Trust |
|
|
Treasury Stock |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2007 |
|
|
39,307,103 |
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
|
$ |
393,072 |
|
|
$ |
1,387 |
|
|
$ |
24,779,798 |
|
|
$ |
50,724,674 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(2,349,000 |
) |
|
$ |
(974,746 |
) |
|
$ |
72,575,185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option exercises |
|
|
1,816,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,160 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,530,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,615,140 |
|
|
|
(7,448,939 |
) |
|
|
(3,287,939 |
) |
Restricted stock awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase of common shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,999,788 |
) |
|
|
(2,999,788 |
) |
Retirement of treasury shares |
|
|
(965,084 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,654 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,032,051 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,041,705 |
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,271,230 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,271,230 |
|
Net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,037,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40,037,323 |
|
Excess tax benefit on exercise
stock options
and vesting of restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,706,778 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,706,778 |
|
Amortization of deferred
compensation in
connection with restricted stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
333,959 |
|
Declaration of dividends |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,107,927 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15,107,927 |
) |
Net unrealized gains on
investments, net of
tax effect $15,595 of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
40,158,019 |
|
|
|
138,640 |
|
|
$ |
401,578 |
|
|
$ |
1,387 |
|
|
$ |
33,587,414 |
|
|
$ |
75,654,070 |
|
|
$ |
24,834 |
|
|
$ |
(733,860 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,381,768 |
) |
|
$ |
101,553,655 |
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
51
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income |
|
$ |
36,983,762 |
|
|
$ |
28,787,298 |
|
|
$ |
40,037,323 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bad debt expense |
|
|
1,314,800 |
|
|
|
1,353,662 |
|
|
|
2,134,106 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
831,159 |
|
|
|
490,059 |
|
|
|
480,313 |
|
Amortization of cost of stock options |
|
|
2,108,705 |
|
|
|
1,520,647 |
|
|
|
4,271,230 |
|
Amortization of restricted stock grants |
|
|
852,692 |
|
|
|
654,824 |
|
|
|
333,959 |
|
Net realized gains on investments |
|
|
(27,691,623 |
) |
|
|
(24,175,045 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on investments |
|
|
(1,753,919 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency gains on investments, net |
|
|
(1,143,058 |
) |
|
|
(6,759,586 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Amortization of premium / accretion of discount, net |
|
|
544,837 |
|
|
|
235,842 |
|
|
|
35,095 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(1,333,361 |
) |
|
|
1,880,794 |
|
|
|
73,898 |
|
Other |
|
|
(626,792 |
) |
|
|
130,118 |
|
|
|
137,571 |
|
Net change in assets and liabilities relating to operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums |
|
|
(20,791,692 |
) |
|
|
(27,247,465 |
) |
|
|
(373,981 |
) |
Reinsurance recoverables |
|
|
12,264,558 |
|
|
|
(47,806,586 |
) |
|
|
2,389,418 |
|
Premiums receivable, net |
|
|
(7,574,296 |
) |
|
|
1,641,948 |
|
|
|
(6,298,004 |
) |
Other receivables |
|
|
2,810,472 |
|
|
|
(2,551,005 |
) |
|
|
(467,097 |
) |
Income taxes recoverable |
|
|
3,211,874
|
|
|
|
(728,952
|
) |
|
|
(2,482,923 |
) |
Deferred policy acquisition costs, net |
|
|
18,945 |
|
|
|
(9,056,678 |
) |
|
|
(407,946 |
) |
Deferred ceding commission, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,122,269 |
) |
Purchase of fixed maturities, trading |
|
|
(486,695,452 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of fixed maturities, trading |
|
|
408,983,414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of equity securities, trading |
|
|
(131,298,910 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of equity securities, trading |
|
|
140,322,216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
(778,983 |
) |
|
|
28,656 |
|
|
|
(292,448 |
) |
Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses |
|
|
31,731,084 |
|
|
|
39,249,979 |
|
|
|
19,132,274 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
49,964,003 |
|
|
|
19,881,084 |
|
|
|
3,748,262 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
594,667 |
|
|
|
25,366 |
|
|
|
175,113 |
|
Reinsurance payable |
|
|
(35,158,111 |
) |
|
|
49,120,347 |
|
|
|
(9,904,102 |
) |
Income taxes payable |
|
|
7,913,062 |
|
|
|
368,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
2,399,217 |
|
|
|
6,069,942 |
|
|
|
(2,118,864 |
) |
Advance premium |
|
|
2,761,182 |
|
|
|
4,218,357 |
|
|
|
1,824,757 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities |
|
|
(9,235,548 |
) |
|
|
37,332,574 |
|
|
|
50,305,685 |
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of property |
|
|
32,608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
Purchase of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(1,713,848 |
) |
|
|
(762,075 |
) |
|
|
(486,742 |
) |
Purchases of fixed maturities, held-to-maturity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,369,500 |
) |
Purchases of fixed maturities, available-for-sale |
|
|
(129,140,469 |
) |
|
|
(325,673,805 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of fixed maturities, available-for-sale |
|
|
116,237,712 |
|
|
|
299,033,089 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of equity securities, available for sale |
|
|
(80,730,225 |
) |
|
|
(206,053,904 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales of equity securities, available for sale |
|
|
70,680,944 |
|
|
|
147,635,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(24,633,278 |
) |
|
|
(85,821,615 |
) |
|
|
(4,853,742 |
) |
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank overdraft |
|
|
2,733,254 |
|
|
|
4,597,131 |
|
|
|
15,699,930 |
|
Preferred stock dividend |
|
|
(19,950 |
) |
|
|
(27,450 |
) |
|
|
(49,950 |
) |
Common stock dividend |
|
|
(12,533,376 |
) |
|
|
(20,313,547 |
) |
|
|
(18,299,123 |
) |
Issuance of common stock |
|
|
14,000 |
|
|
|
55,000 |
|
|
|
130,530 |
|
Repurchase of treasury stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,999,788 |
) |
Treasury shares on option exercise |
|
|
(4,292,485 |
) |
|
|
(223,376 |
) |
|
|
(3,418,469 |
) |
Excess tax benefits from stock-based compensation |
|
|
4,099,145 |
|
|
|
728,584 |
|
|
|
5,706,778 |
|
Repayments of loans payable |
|
|
(1,470,589 |
) |
|
|
(367,647 |
) |
|
|
(2,820 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(11,470,001 |
) |
|
|
(15,551,305 |
) |
|
|
(3,232,912 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(45,338,827 |
) |
|
|
(64,040,346 |
) |
|
|
42,219,031 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
192,924,291 |
|
|
|
256,964,637 |
|
|
|
214,745,606 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
|
$ |
256,964,637 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental cashflow disclosures: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
804,898 |
|
|
$ |
740,118 |
|
|
$ |
1,549,292 |
|
Income taxes |
|
$ |
11,163,437 |
|
|
$ |
15,609,000 |
|
|
$ |
22,266,491 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements
52
UNIVERSAL INSURANCE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1 NATURE OF OPERATIONS AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Nature of Operations
Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. (the Company) is a Delaware corporation originally
incorporated as Universal Heights, Inc. in November 1990. The Company changed its name to Universal
Insurance Holdings, Inc. on January 12, 2001. The Company is a vertically integrated insurance
holding company performing all aspects of insurance underwriting, distribution and claims. Through
its wholly-owned subsidiaries, including Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company (UPCIC),
the Company is principally engaged in the property and casualty insurance business offered
primarily through a network of independent agents. The Companys primary product is homeowners
insurance currently offered in five states, including Florida, which represented 98% and 99% of in
force policies as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The geographic distribution of
business within Florida is broad with 32% and 32% of in force policies in Miami-Dade, Broward and
Palm Beach Counties of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Risk from catastrophic losses is
managed through the use of reinsurance agreements.
The Company generates revenues primarily from the collection of premiums and the investment of
those premiums. Other significant sources of revenue include commissions collected from reinsurers
and policy fees.
NOTE 2 SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The significant accounting policies followed by the Company are summarized as follows:
Basis of Presentation and Consolidation. The consolidated financial statements have been prepared
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
(GAAP). The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Universal Insurance
Holdings, Inc and its wholly owned subsidiaries, and the Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. Stock
Grantor Trust. All intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
To conform to the 2010 presentation, certain amounts in the prior periods consolidated financial
statements and notes have been reclassified. Such reclassifications were of an immaterial amount
and had no effect on net income or stockholders equity.
Use of Estimates. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the consolidated
financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting
periods. The Companys primary areas of estimate are the recognition of premium revenues,
insurance liabilities, deferred policy acquisition costs and reinsurance. Actual results could
differ from those estimates.
Cash and Cash Equivalents. The Company includes in cash equivalents all short-term, highly liquid
investments that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and have an original maturity of
three months or less. These amounts are carried at cost, which approximates fair value.
Investments. Investment securities consist of both debt and equity securities. Investments are
classified as trading, available for sale, or held to maturity, based on managements intent and
ability to hold to maturity. Investment securities held in trading and available for sale are
recorded at fair value on the consolidated balance sheet while investments held to maturity are
recorded at costs, adjusted for amortization of premiums or discounts and other than temporary
declines in fair value.
Unrealized gains and losses on trading securities are reported in current period earnings.
Unrealized gains and losses on securities available for sale are excluded from earnings and are
reported as a component of other comprehensive income, net of related deferred taxes until
reclassified to earnings upon the consummation of sales transaction with an unrelated third party
or when the decline in fair value is deemed other than temporary.
53
The assessment of whether the impairment of a securitys fair value is other than temporary is
performed using a portfolio review as well as a case-by-case review considering a wide range of
factors. There are a number of assumptions and estimates inherent in evaluating impairments and
determining if they are other than temporary, including: 1) the Companys ability and intent to
hold the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value;
2) the expected recoverability of principal and interest; 3) the length of time and extent to which
the fair value has been less than amortized cost for fixed income securities or cost for equity
securities; 4) the financial condition, near-term and long-term prospects of the issue or issuer,
including relevant industry conditions and trends, and implications of rating agency actions and
offering prices; and 5) the specific reasons that a security is in a significant unrealized loss
position, including market conditions which could affect liquidity. Additionally, once assumptions
and estimates are made, any number of changes in facts and circumstances could cause us to
subsequently determine that an impairment is other than temporary, including: 1) general economic
conditions that are worse than previously forecasted or that have a greater adverse effect on a
particular issuer or industry sector than originally estimated; 2) changes in the facts and
circumstances related to a particular issue or issuers ability to meet all of its contractual
obligations; and 3) changes in facts and circumstances obtained that causes a change in our ability
or intent to hold a security to maturity or until it recovers in value.
Gains and losses realized on the disposition of investment securities are determined on the
first-in-first-out basis (FIFO) and credited or charged to income. Prior to 2009, the Company
used the specific identification method for determining realized gains and losses. Beginning in
2009, the Company began using the FIFO method due to the increase in size and complexity of its
investment portfolio. Premium and discount on investment securities are amortized and accreted
using the interest method and charged or credited to investment income.
Premiums Receivable. Generally, premiums are collected prior to providing risk coverage,
minimizing the Companys exposure to credit risk. The Company performs a policy level evaluation
to determine the extent the premiums receivable balance exceeds the unearned premiums balance. The
Company then ages this exposure to establish an allowance for doubtful accounts based on prior
experience. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had recorded allowances for doubtful
accounts in the amounts of $111,456 and $2,701,822, respectively.
Property and Equipment. Property and equipment is recorded at cost less accumulated depreciation.
Depreciation is provided on the straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the assets.
Estimated useful life of all property and equipment ranges from three to twenty-seven-and-one-half
years. Expenditures for improvements are capitalized and depreciated over the remaining useful life
of the asset. Routine repairs and maintenance are expensed as incurred. Website development costs
are capitalized and amortized over their estimated useful life. The Company reviews its property
and equipment annually and whenever changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may
not be recoverable.
Recognition of Premium Revenues. The Company recognizes revenue when reaized or realizable and
earned. Property and liability premiums are recognized as revenue on a pro rata basis over the
policy term. The portion of premiums that will be earned in the future is deferred and reported as
unearned premiums. The Company believes that its revenue recognition policies conform to GAAP. In
the event policyholders cancel their policies, unearned premiums represent amounts that UPCIC would
refund policyholders. Accordingly, UPCIC determines unearned premiums by calculating the pro rata
amount that would be due to the policyholders at a given point in time based upon the premiums owed
over the life of each policy.
Recognition of Commission Revenue. Commission revenue, which is comprised of the Managing General
Agent (MGA)s policy fee income on all new and renewal insurance policies and commissions generated
from agency operations is recognized as income upon policy inception. The Company believes that its
revenue recognition policies conform to GAAP.
Recognition of Policyholder Payment Plan Fee Revenue. UPCIC offers its policyholders the option of
paying their policy premiums in full at inception or in two or four installment payments. UPCIC
charges fees to its policyholders that elect to pay their premium in installments and records such
fees as revenue when the policyholder makes the installment payment election and UPCIC bills the
fees to the policyholder. These fees are included in Other Revenue in the Companys Consolidated
Statements of Income. The Company believes that its revenue recognition policies conform to
GAAP.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs. Policy acquisition costs consist primarily of commissions,
premium taxes and other costs of acquiring new and renewal insurance business. These costs are
deferred and amortized over the terms of the policies to which they are related. Reinsurance
ceding commissions received are deferred and amortized over the
54
effective period of the related insurance policies. Deferred policy acquisition costs and deferred
ceding commissions are netted for balance sheet presentation purposes.
Insurance Liabilities. Unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses (LAE) are provided for as
claims are incurred. The provision for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses includes: (1) the
accumulation of individual case estimates for claims and claim adjustment expenses reported prior
to the close of the accounting period; (2) estimates for unreported claims based on industry data;
and (3) estimates of expenses for investigating and adjusting claims based on the experience of the
Company and the industry.
Inherent in the estimates of ultimate claims are expected trends in claim severity, frequency and
other factors that may vary as claims are settled. The amount of uncertainty in the estimates for
casualty coverage is significantly affected by such factors as the amount of claims experience
relative to the development period, knowledge of the actual facts and circumstances and the amount
of insurance risk retained. In addition, UPCICs policyholders are currently concentrated in South
Florida, which is periodically subject to adverse weather conditions, such as hurricanes and
tropical storms. The methods for making such estimates and for establishing the resulting
liability are continually reviewed, and any adjustments are reflected in current earnings.
Provision for Premium Deficiency. It is the Companys policy to evaluate and recognize losses on
insurance contracts when estimated future claims and maintenance costs under a group of existing
contracts will exceed anticipated future premiums. No accruals for premium deficiency were
considered necessary as of December 31, 2010 and 2009.
Reinsurance. In the normal course of business, the Company seeks to reduce the risk of loss that
may arise from catastrophes or other events that cause unfavorable underwriting results by
reinsuring (ceding) certain levels of risk in various areas of exposure with other insurance
enterprises or reinsurers. The Company is required to pay losses to the extent reinsurers are
unable to discharge their obligations under the reinsurance agreements. Amounts recoverable from
reinsurers are estimated in a manner consistent with the provisions of the reinsurance agreement
and consistent with the establishment of the liability of the Company. Allowances are established
for amounts deemed uncollectible.
Income Taxes. Income tax provisions are based on the asset and liability method. Deferred federal
and state income taxes have been provided for temporary differences between the tax basis of assets
and liabilities and their reported amounts in the consolidated financial statements, net of
valuation allowance. The Company reviews its deferred tax assets for recoverability.
Income (Loss) Per Share of Common Stock. Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing the
Companys net income (loss), less Preferred Stock dividends, by the weighted-average number of
shares of Common Stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share is computed by
dividing the Companys net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares of Common Stock
outstanding during the period and the impact of all dilutive potential common shares, primarily
Preferred Stock, options and warrants. The dilutive impact of stock options and warrants is
determined by applying the treasury stock method and the dilutive impact of the Preferred Stock is
determined by applying the if converted method.
Fair Value Measurements. Effective January 1, 2010, the Company adopted new guidance that requires
the Company to report significant transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 and the reasons for those
transfers, as well as disclosing the reasons for transfers in or out of Level 3, including
presenting the reconciliation of the changes in Level 3 fair value measurements separately for
purchases, sales and settlements on a gross basis rather than as a net amount. Additionally, the
guidance requires the Company to clarify existing disclosure requirements about the level of
disaggregation and inputs and valuation techniques. The adoption of this guidance did not have an
impact on the Companys financial statements, other than expanded disclosures.
Disclosures about the purchases, sales, issuances and settlements in the roll forward activity
in Level 3 fair value measurements will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15,
2010. The Company does not expect the adoption of the guidance for Level 3 activity to have a
significant impact on its financial statements.
In 2009, the Company adopted the guidance for nonrecurring fair value measurements of
nonfinancial assets and liabilities, which guidance had been previously deferred. The adoption of
this guidance had no material effect on the Companys financial condition or results of operations.
Concentrations of Credit Risk. The Company is exposed to concentrations of credit risk, consisting
principally of cash and cash equivalents, debt securities, premiums receivable and
reinsurance recoverables.
55
Concentrations of credit risk with respect to cash on deposit are limited by the Companys policy
of investing excess cash with custodial institutions who invest primarily in money market accounts
and repurchase agreements backed by the United States Government and United States Government
agency securities with major national banks. These accounts are held by the Institutional Trust &
Custody division of U.S. Bank, the Trust Department of SunTrust Bank and Bank of New York Trust
Fund.
The Company maintains depository relationships with SunTrust Bank and Wachovia Bank, N.A. It is the
Companys policy not to have a balance of more than $250,000 for any of its affiliates at either
institution on any given day to minimize exposure to a bank failure. Cash balances in excess of
$250,000 are transferred daily into custodial accounts with SunTrust Bank where cash is immediately
invested into shares of Federated Treasury Obligations Money Market Funds.
Cash and cash equivalents consisted of checking, repurchase and money market accounts with carrying
values of $147,585,464 and $192,924,291 as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 |
Institution |
|
Cash |
|
|
Money Market Funds |
|
|
Total |
|
|
% |
|
|
U. S. Bank IT&C |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
41,454,392 |
|
|
$ |
41,454,392 |
|
|
|
28.1 |
% |
SunTrust Bank |
|
|
1,241,149 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,241,149 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
% |
SunTrust Bank Institutional Asset Services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
92,323,784 |
|
|
|
92,323,784 |
|
|
|
62.6 |
% |
Wachovia Bank a division of Wlss Fargo Bank N.A. |
|
|
780,180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
780,180 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
Bank of New York Trust Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,340,000 |
|
|
|
11,340,000 |
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
All Other Banking Institutions |
|
|
443,050 |
|
|
|
2,909 |
|
|
|
445,959 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,464,379 |
|
|
$ |
145,121,085 |
|
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
Institution |
|
Cash |
|
|
Money Market Funds |
|
|
Total |
|
|
% |
|
|
U. S. Bank IT&C (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
71,977,371 |
|
|
$ |
71,977,371 |
|
|
|
37.3 |
% |
Evergreen Investment
Management Company, L.L.C. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,909 |
|
|
|
26,909 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
% |
SunTrust Bank |
|
|
1,063,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,063,785 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
SunTrust Bank Institutional
Asset Services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
102,257,833 |
|
|
|
102,257,833 |
|
|
|
53.0 |
% |
Wachovia Bank, N.A. |
|
|
489,051 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
489,051 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
Bank of New York Trust Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,515,181 |
|
|
|
16,515,181 |
|
|
|
8.6 |
% |
All Other Banking Institutions |
|
|
594,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
594,161 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,146,997 |
|
|
$ |
190,777,294 |
|
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Funds invested with Evergreen Investment Management Company, L.L.C. |
All debt securities owned by the Company as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 are direct obligations of the U.S. Treasury.
Concentrations of credit risk with respect to premiums receivable are limited due to the large
number of individuals comprising the Companys customer base. However, the majority of the
Companys revenues are currently derived from products and services offered to customers in
Florida, which could be adversely affected by economic downturns, an increase in competition or
other environmental changes.
In order to reduce credit risk for amounts due from reinsurers, UPCIC and another Company
subsidiary, American Platinum Property and Casualty Insurance Company (APPCIC), seek to do
business with financially sound reinsurance companies and regularly evaluate the financial strength
of all reinsurers used. UPCICs largest reinsurer, Everest Reinsurance Company, has the following
ratings from each of the rating agencies: A+ from A.M. Best Company, A+ from Standard and Poors
Rating Services and Aa3 from Moodys Investors Service, Inc. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009,
UPCICs reinsurance portfolio contained the following authorized reinsurers that had unsecured
recoverables for paid and unpaid losses, including incurred but not reported (IBNR) reserves,
loss adjustment expenses and unearned premiums whose aggregate balance exceeded 3% of UPCICs
statutory surplus:
56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
Reinsurer |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Everest Reinsurance Company |
|
$ |
227,941,896 |
|
|
$ |
208,129,753 |
|
Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund |
|
|
32,848,543 |
|
|
|
24,888,534 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
260,790,439 |
|
|
$ |
233,018,287 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based Compensation. The Company accounts for share-based compensation based on the estimated
grant-date fair value. The Company recognizes these compensation costs in general and
administrative expenses on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award,
which is the vesting term. The fair value of stock option awards are estimated using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model with the grant-date assumptions discussed in Note 10. The fair
value of the restricted share grants are determined based on the market price on the date of grant.
Statutory Accounting. UPCIC and APPCIC prepare statutory financial statements in conformity with
accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the Office of Insurance Regulation of the State of
Florida. Effective January 1, 2001, the Office of Insurance Regulation of the State of Florida
required that insurance companies domiciled in the State of Florida prepare their statutory
financial statements in accordance with the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual (the
Manual), as modified by the Office of Insurance Regulation of the State of Florida. Accordingly,
the admitted assets, liabilities and capital and surplus of UPCIC and APCIC as of December 31, 2010
and 2009 and the results of operations and cash flows, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009
and 2008, have been determined in accordance with statutory accounting principles, but adjusted to
GAAP for purposes of these financial statements. The statutory accounting principles are designed
primarily to demonstrate the ability to meet obligations to policyholders and claimants and,
consequently, differ in some respects from GAAP.
Other New Accounting Pronouncements
In April 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued guidance on Recognition
and Presentation of Other-than-Temporary Impairments, which amends the criteria for the
recognition of other-than-temporary impairments (OTTI) for debt securities and requires that
credit losses be recognized in earnings and losses resulting from factors other than credit of the
issuer be recognized in other comprehensive income. Prior to adoption, all OTTI was recorded in
earnings in the period of recognition. This guidance is effective for interim and annual periods
ending after June 15, 2009, and requires a cumulative effect adjustment to the opening balance of
retained earnings with a corresponding adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income. The
Company adopted this guidance in the second quarter of 2009. The adoption of this guidance did not
have an effect on the results of operations or financial position of the Company.
In April 2009, the FASB issued guidance on Determining Fair Value When the Volume and Level of
Activity for the Asset or Liability Have Significantly Decreased and Identifying Transactions That
Are Not Orderly. Under this guidance, if an entity determines that there has been a significant
decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset or the liability in relation to the
normal market activity for the asset or liability (or similar assets or liabilities), then
transactions or quoted prices may not accurately reflect fair value. In addition, if there is
evidence that the transaction for the asset or liability is not orderly, the entity shall place
little, if any, weight on that transaction price as an indicator of fair value. This guidance is
effective for interim and annual periods ending after June 15, 2009, and shall be applied
prospectively. The Company adopted this guidance in the second quarter of 2009. The adoption of
this guidance did not have an effect on the results of operations or financial position of the
Company.
In April 2009, the FASB issued guidance on Interim Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial
Instruments, which requires disclosures about fair value of financial instruments for interim
reporting periods of publicly traded companies as well as in annual financial statements. This
guidance requires fair value disclosures on a quarterly basis, providing qualitative and
quantitative information about fair value estimates for all those financial instruments not
measured on the balance sheet at fair value. This guidance is effective for interim reporting
periods ending after June 15, 2009 and was adopted by the Company in the second quarter of 2009.
The adoption of this guidance did not have an effect on the results of operations or financial
position of the Company.
In June 2009, the FASB issued guidance on The FASB Accounting Standards Codification and the
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, which establishes the FASB Accounting
Standards Codification as the sole source of authoritative U.S. GAAP recognized by the FASB to be
applied to nongovernmental entities. Rules and interpretive releases of the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) promulgated under the authority of the federal securities laws are also
sources of authoritative GAAP for SEC registrants. This guidance is effective for
57
financial statements issued for interim and annual periods ending after September 15, 2009 and was
adopted by the Company in the third quarter of 2009. The FASB Accounting Standards Codification
supersedes all existing non-SEC accounting and reporting standards. The adoption of this guidance
changed the Companys references to U.S. GAAP accounting standards but did not have an effect on
the results of operations or financial position of the Company.
In September 2010, the FASB issued amendments to existing guidance on accounting for costs
associated with acquiring or renewing insurance contracts. The amendments modify the types of costs
incurred by insurance entities that can be capitalized in the acquisition of new and renewal
insurance contracts. Under this guidance, these deferred acquisition costs are varied and related
to the acquisition of new and renewal insurance contracts. Those costs include agent and broker
commissions, salaries of certain employees involved in underwriting and policy issuance, and
medical and inspection fees. The amendments are effective for interim and annual periods beginning
after December 15, 2011. Therefore, the Company is required to adopt this guidance on January 1,
2012. The Company is currently evaluating the requirements of the amendments and the potential
impact, if any, on the Companys financial position and results of operations.
NOTE 3 REINSURANCE
UPCIC seeks to protect against the risk of catastrophic loss by obtaining reinsurance coverage as
of the beginning of the hurricane season on June 1 of each year. UPCICs reinsurance program
consists of excess of loss, quota share and catastrophe reinsurance, subject to the terms and
conditions of the applicable agreements.
On December 31, 2010, UPCIC and Segregated Account T25 Universal Insurance Holdings of White Rock
Insurance (SAC) Ltd. (T25) mutually agreed to a Commutation and Settlement Agreement related to
the Underlying Property Catastrophe Excess of Loss Reinsurance Contract effective June 1, 2010. A
replacement contract was entered into between the parties on January 1, 2011 as part of UPCICs
reinsurance program in effect for the period June 1, 2010, through May 31, 2011. In conjunction
with the commutation, T25 returned $18,350,500 to UPCIC as a contractual premium adjustment. No
additional collateral was required for the replacement contract, effective January 1, 2011. The
Company is the account owner of T25 under Bermuda law, and the reinsurance transactions between T25
and UPCIC are eliminated in consolidation.
UPCICs in-force policyholder coverage for windstorm exposures as of December 31, 2010 was
approximately $126.8 billion. In the normal course of business, UPCIC also seeks to reduce the risk
of loss that may arise from catastrophes or other events that cause unfavorable underwriting
results by reinsuring certain levels of risk in various areas of exposure with other insurance
enterprises or reinsurers.
Amounts recoverable from reinsurers are estimated in a manner consistent with the reinsurance
contracts. Reinsurance premiums, losses and LAE are accounted for on a basis consistent with those
used in accounting for the original policies issued and the terms of the reinsurance contracts.
Reinsurance ceding commissions received are deferred and netted against policy acquisition costs
and amortized over the effective period of the related insurance policies.
The Companys reinsurance arrangements had the following effect on certain items in the condensed
consolidated Statements of Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and Loss |
|
|
|
Premiums |
|
|
Premiums |
|
|
Adjustment |
|
|
|
Written |
|
|
Earned |
|
|
Expenses |
|
Direct |
|
$ |
666,309,262 |
|
|
$ |
616,345,258 |
|
|
$ |
229,044,188 |
|
Ceded |
|
|
(466,694,053 |
) |
|
|
(445,902,361 |
) |
|
|
(115,688,713 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
$ |
199,615,209 |
|
|
$ |
170,442,897 |
|
|
$ |
113,355,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and Loss |
|
|
|
Premiums |
|
|
Premiums |
|
|
Adjustment |
|
|
|
Written |
|
|
Earned |
|
|
Expenses |
|
Direct |
|
$ |
562,671,620 |
|
|
$ |
542,790,538 |
|
|
$ |
214,981,546 |
|
Ceded |
|
|
(428,384,278 |
) |
|
|
(401,136,813 |
) |
|
|
(108,848,411 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
$ |
134,287,342 |
|
|
$ |
141,653,725 |
|
|
$ |
106,133,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and Loss |
|
|
|
Premiums |
|
|
Premiums |
|
|
Adjustment |
|
|
|
Written |
|
|
Earned |
|
|
Expenses |
|
Direct |
|
$ |
511,369,676 |
|
|
$ |
507,621,412 |
|
|
$ |
160,615,643 |
|
Ceded |
|
|
(360,581,696 |
) |
|
|
(360,207,715 |
) |
|
|
(79,277,517 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
$ |
150,787,980 |
|
|
$ |
147,413,697 |
|
|
$ |
81,338,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Amounts:
Prepaid reinsurance premiums and reinsurance recoverables as December 31, 2010 and 2009 were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums |
|
$ |
221,085,933 |
|
|
$ |
200,294,241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance
recoverable on unpaid losses and LAE |
|
$ |
79,114,418 |
|
|
$ |
62,900,913 |
|
Reinsurance recoverable on paid losses |
|
|
437,457 |
|
|
|
28,915,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance recoverables |
|
$ |
79,551,875 |
|
|
$ |
91,816,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company has determined that a right of offset exists between UPCIC and its reinsurers.
Reinsurance payable to reinsurers has been offset by ceding commissions and inuring premiums
receivable from reinsurers as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Reinsurance payable, net of ceding commissions
due from reinsurers |
|
$ |
75,553,629 |
|
|
$ |
114,286,847 |
|
Inuring premiums receivable |
|
|
(37,607,145 |
) |
|
|
(41,182,252 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reinsurance payable, net |
|
$ |
37,946,484 |
|
|
$ |
73,104,595 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 Reinsurance Program
Quota Share
Effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, UPCIC entered into a quota share reinsurance contract
with Everest Re. Everest Re has the following ratings from each of the rating agencies: A+ from
A.M. Best Company, A+ from Standard and Poors Rating Services and Aa3 from Moodys Investors
Service, Inc. Under the quota share contract, UPCIC cedes 50% of its gross written premiums,
losses and LAE for policies with coverage for wind risk with a ceding commission equal to 25% of
ceded gross written premiums. In addition, the quota share contract has a limitation for any one
occurrence of 56% of gross premiums earned, not to exceed $160,000,000 (of which UPCICs net
liability on the
59
first $160,000,000 of losses in a first event scenario is $22,500,000, in a second
event scenario is $13,150,000 and in a third event scenario is $15,000,000) and a limitation from
losses arising out of events that are assigned a catastrophe serial number by the Property Claims
Services (PCS) office of 140% of gross premiums earned, not to exceed $400,000,000.
Excess Per Risk
Effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, UPCIC entered into a multiple line excess per risk
contract with various reinsurers. Under the multiple line excess per risk contract, UPCIC obtained
coverage of $1,400,000 in excess of $600,000 ultimate net loss for each risk and each property
loss, and $1,000,000 in excess of $300,000 for each casualty loss. A $7,000,000 aggregate limit
applies to the term of the contract.
Effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, UPCIC entered into a property per risk excess contract
covering ex-wind only policies. Under the property per risk excess contract, UPCIC obtained
coverage of $400,000 in excess of $200,000 for each property loss. A $2,000,000 aggregate limit
applies to the term of the contract.
The total cost of UPCICs multiple line excess reinsurance program effective June 1, 2010 through
May 31, 2011 is $3,500,000 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $1,750,000, and the quota share
reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. The total cost of UPCICs property per risk reinsurance
program effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011 is $475,000.Excess CatastropheEffective June 1,
2010 through May 31, 2011, under excess catastrophe contracts, UPCIC obtained catastrophe coverage
of $660,500,000 in excess of $160,000,000 covering certain loss occurrences including hurricanes.
The coverage of $660,500,000 in excess of $160,000,000 has a second full limit available to UPCIC;
additional premium is calculated pro rata as to amount and 100% as to time, as applicable.
Effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, UPCIC purchased reinstatement premium protection which
reimburses UPCIC for its cost to reinstate the catastrophe coverage of the first $310,500,000 (part
of $660,500,000) in excess of $160,000,000. Effective January 1, 2011 through December 31, 2011,
under an underlying excess catastrophe contract, UPCIC obtained catastrophe coverage of 50% of
$105,000,000 in excess of $55,000,000 covering certain loss occurrences including hurricanes. UPCIC
entered into this contract with T25. The Company has secured the obligations of T25 by
contributing the amount of T25s liability for losses, net of UPCICs required premium payments, to
a trust account.Effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, under an excess catastrophe contract
specifically covering risks located in North Carolina and South Carolina, UPCIC obtained
catastrophe coverage of 50% of $40,000,000 in excess of $10,000,000 covering certain loss
occurrences including hurricanes. The coverage of 50% of $40,000,000 in excess of $10,000,000 has a
second full limit available to UPCIC; additional premium is calculated pro rata as to amount and
100% as to time, as applicable. The cost of UPCICs excess catastrophe contract specifically
covering risks located in North Carolina and South Carolina is $2,025,000.
Effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011, UPCIC also obtained subsequent catastrophe event
excess of loss reinsurance to cover certain levels of UPCICs net retention through three
catastrophe events including hurricanes, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2ndEvent |
|
3rdEvent |
Coverage
|
|
$123,700,000 in excess
of $36,300,000 each
loss occurrence
subject to an
otherwise recoverable
amount of $123,700,000
(placed 50%)
|
|
$130,000,000 in excess
of $30,000,000 each
loss occurrence
subject to an
otherwise
recoverable amount of
$260,000,000
(placed 100%) |
|
|
|
|
|
Deposit premium (100%)
|
|
$22,266,000
|
|
$9,100,000 |
Minimum premium (100%)
|
|
$17,812,800
|
|
$7,280,000 |
Premium rate -% of
total insured value
|
|
0.020088%
|
|
0.00821% |
UPCIC also obtained coverage from the FHCF, which is administered by the SBA. Under the
reimbursement agreement, the FHCF would reimburse UPCIC, for each loss occurrence during the
contract year, for 90% of the
60
ultimate loss paid by UPCIC in excess of its retention plus 5% of the reimbursed losses to cover
loss adjustment expenses, subject to an aggregate contract limit. A covered event means any one
storm declared to be a hurricane by the National Hurricane Center for losses incurred in Florida,
both while it is a hurricane and through subsequent downgrades. For the contract year June 1, 2010
to May 31, 2011, UPCIC purchased the traditional FHCF coverage and did not purchase the Temporary
Increase in Coverage Limit Option offered to insurers by the FHCF. As of December 31, 2010 the
estimated coverage is 90% of $1,161,179,608 in excess of $422,612,828. The estimated premium for
this coverage is $68,296,648.
Also at June 1, 2010, the FHCF made available, and UPCIC obtained, $10,000,000 of additional
catastrophe excess of loss coverage with one free reinstatement of coverage to carriers qualified
as Limited Apportionment Companies or companies that participated in the Insurance Capital Build-Up
Incentive (ICBUI) Program offered by the FHCF, such as UPCIC. This particular layer of coverage
at June 1, 2010 is $10,000,000 in excess of $26,300,000. The premium for this coverage is
$5,000,000.
On October 29, 2010, the SBA published its most recent estimate of the FHCFs loss reimbursement
capacity in the Florida Administrative Weekly. The SBA estimated that the FHCFs total
claims-paying capacity under current market conditions for the 2010 2011 contract year is
projected to be $18.776 billion over the 12-month period following the estimate. The SBA also
referred to its report entitled, October 2010 Estimated Claims Paying Capacity Report (Report)
as providing greater detail regarding the FHCFs claims-paying capacity. The Report estimated that
the FHCFs minimum 12-month claims-paying capacity is $19.414 billion and its maximum 12-month
claims-paying capacity is $35.414 billion with an average claims-paying capacity of $25.414
billion. This projected claims-paying capacity exceeds the FHCFs maximum statutory obligation for
2010 of $18.776 billion. Claims-paying capacity exceeding the FHCFs maximum statutory obligation
for a single contract year may be available for insurer reimbursements in future contract
years. UPCIC purchased the FHCF Mandatory Layer of Coverage for the 2010 2011 contract year,
which corresponds to FHCF loss reimbursement capacity of $17 billion. In the event the aggregate
amount of reimbursement coverage requested by insurers for a particular contract year exceeds the
FHCFs actual claims-paying capacity, the FHCFs obligation to reimburse insurers is limited by law
to its actual claims-paying capacity. The aggregate cost of UPCICs reinsurance program may
increase should UPCIC deem it necessary to purchase additional private market reinsurance due to
reduced estimates of the FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity.
The total cost of UPCICs multiple line excess and property per risk reinsurance program effective
June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011 is $3,975,000 of which UPCICs cost is $2,225,000, and the quota
share reinsurers cost is the remaining $1,750,000. The cost of UPCICs underlying excess
catastrophe contract is $42,000,000, subject to a potential return premium of up to $31,458,000,
should the contract remain in force for an annual period. The total cost of UPCICs private
catastrophe reinsurance program effective June 1, 2010 through May 31, 2011 is $134,538,000 of
which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $67,269,000, and the quota share reinsurers cost is the remaining
50%. In addition, UPCIC purchases reinstatement premium protection as described above, the cost of
which is $16,210,064. UPCICs cost of the subsequent catastrophe event excess of loss reinsurance
is $15,683,000. The estimated premium that UPCIC plans to cede to the FHCF for the 2010 hurricane
season is $68,296,648 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $34,148,324 and the quota share reinsurers
cost is the remaining 50%. UPCIC is also participating in the additional coverage option for
Limited Apportionment Companies or companies that participated in the ICBUI Program offered by the
FHCF, the premium for which is $5,000,000 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $2,500,000, and the
quota share reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. The Company is responsible for losses related to
catastrophic events with incurred losses in excess of coverage provided by UPCICs reinsurance
program which could have a material adverse effect on the Companys business, financial condition
and results of operations. UPCICs private market reinsurance costs are subject to increases or
decreases if changes in its earned premiums or the total insured value under its in-force policies
as of August 31, 2010, are outside of ranges specified in certain of its reinsurance contracts.
Effective June 1, 2010 through December 31, 2010, the Company obtained $60,000,000 of coverage via
a catastrophe risk-linked transaction contract in the event UPCICs catastrophe coverage is
exhausted. The total cost of the Companys risk-linked transaction contract is $8,250,000.
UPCIC is responsible for losses related to catastrophic events with incurred losses in excess of
coverage provided by UPCICs reinsurance program and for losses that otherwise are not covered by
the reinsurance program, which could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the Companys
business, financial condition and results of operations. UPCIC estimates based upon its in-force
exposures as of December 31, 2010, that it had coverage to approximately the 127-year PML, modeled
using AIR CLASIC/2 v.11.0, long term, without demand surge and without loss amplification. PML is
a general concept applied in the insurance industry for defining high loss scenarios that should be
considered when underwriting insurance risk. Catastrophe models produce loss estimates that are
qualified in terms of dollars and
61
probabilities. Probability of exceedance or the probability that the actual loss level will exceed
a particular threshold is a standard catastrophe model output. For example, the 100-year PML
represents a 1.00% Annual Probability of Exceedance (the 127-year PML represents a 0.787% Annual
Probability of Exceedance). It is estimated that the 100-year PML is likely to be equaled or
exceeded in one year out of 100 on average, or 1 percent of the time. It is the 99th percentile of
the annual loss distribution.
UPCIC limits the maximum net loss that can arise from large risks or risks in concentrated areas of
exposure by reinsuring (ceding) certain levels of risks with other insurers or reinsurers on an
automatic basis under reinsurance contracts. The reinsurance arrangements are intended to provide
UPCIC with the ability to limit its exposure to losses within its capital resources. Such
reinsurance includes quota share, excess of loss and catastrophe forms of reinsurance. UPCIC
submits the reinsurance program for regulatory review to the OIR.
2009 Reinsurance Program
Quota Share
Effective June 1, 2009, UPCIC entered into a quota share reinsurance treaty with Everest
Reinsurance Company (Everest Re). Everest Re has the following ratings from each of the rating
agencies: A+ from A.M. Best Company, A+ from Standard and Poors Rating Services and Aa3 from
Moodys Investors Service, Inc. Under the quota share treaty, through May 31, 2010, UPCIC cedes
50% of its gross written premiums, losses and LAE for policies with coverage for wind risk, with a
ceding commission payable to UPCIC equal to 25% of ceded gross written premiums. In addition, the
quota share treaty has a limitation for any one occurrence of 58% of gross premiums earned, not to
exceed $160,000,000 (of which UPCICs net liability in a first event scenario is $50,000,000
($75,000,000 net of $25,000,000 retained by the Company under the excess catastrophe contract,
effective June 12, 2009, described in the Excess Catastrophe section below), in a second event
scenario is $16,000,000 and in a third event scenario is $16,000,000) and a limitation from losses
arising out of events that are assigned a catastrophe serial number by the Property Claims Services
(PCS) office of 175% of gross premiums earned, not to exceed $480,000,000.
Excess Per Risk
Effective June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010, UPCIC entered into a multiple line excess per risk
agreement with various reinsurers. Under the multiple line excess per risk agreement, UPCIC
obtained coverage of $1,400,000 in excess of $600,000 ultimate net loss for each risk and each
property loss, and $1,000,000 in excess of $300,000 for each casualty loss. A $7,000,000 aggregate
limit applies to the term of this agreement.
Effective June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010, UPCIC entered into a property per risk excess
agreement covering ex-wind only policies. Under the property per risk excess agreement, UPCIC
obtained coverage of $400,000 in excess of $200,000 for each property loss. A $2,400,000 aggregate
limit applies to the term of the contract.
The total cost of UPCICs multiple line excess reinsurance program effective June 1, 2009 through
May 31, 2010 is $3,000,000 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $1,500,000, and the quota share
reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. The total cost of UPCICs property per risk reinsurance
program effective June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010 is $400,000.
Excess Catastrophe
Effective June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010, under excess catastrophe contracts, UPCIC obtained
catastrophe coverage of $627,000,000 in excess of $160,000,000 covering certain loss occurrences
including hurricanes. The coverage of $627,000,000 in excess of $160,000,000 has a second full
limit available to UPCIC; additional premium is calculated pro rata as to amount and 100% as to
time, as applicable.
Effective June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010, UPCIC purchased a reinstatement premium protection
contract which reimburses UPCIC for its cost to reinstate the catastrophe coverage of the first
$352,000,000 (part of $627,000,000) in excess of $160,000,000.
Effective June 12, 2009 through May 31, 2010, under an excess catastrophe contract, UPCIC obtained
catastrophe coverage of $50,000,000 in excess of $110,000,000 (placed 50%) covering certain loss
occurrences including hurricanes. Loss occurrence is defined as all individual losses directly
occasioned by any one disaster, accident or loss
62
or series of disasters, accidents or losses arising out of one event, which occurs in the State of
Florida. The Company is the reinsurer under this contract through a segregated account set up by
an unrelated company. Accordingly, the Companys aggregate net liability in a first event scenario
is UPCICs $50,000,000 (as noted above in the Quota Share section) and the $25,000,000 coverage
provided by the Company. The intercompany transactions relating to the contract have been
eliminated in consolidation.
Effective June 1, 2009 through May 31, 2010, UPCIC also obtained subsequent catastrophe event
excess of loss reinsurance to cover certain levels of UPCICs net retention through two catastrophe
events including hurricanes, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2nd Event |
|
3rd Event |
Coverage
|
|
$118,000,000 in
excess of $42,000,000
each loss occurrence
subject to an
otherwise recoverable
amount of
$118,000,000 (placed
50%)
|
|
$128,000,000 in
excess of $32,000,000
each loss occurrence
subject to an
otherwise recoverable
amount of
$256,000,000
(placed 100%) |
Deposit premium (100%)
|
|
$21,240,000
|
|
$10,240,000 |
Minimum premium (100%)
|
|
$16,992,000
|
|
$8,192,000 |
Premium rate -% of
total insured value
|
|
0.019309%
|
|
0.009309% |
UPCIC also obtained coverage from the FHCF, which is administered by the Florida SBA. Under the
reimbursement agreement, FHCF would reimburse UPCIC, for each loss occurrence during the contract
year for 90% of the ultimate loss paid by UPCIC in excess of its retention plus 5% of the
reimbursed losses to cover loss adjustment expenses. A covered event means any one storm declared
to be a hurricane by the National Hurricane Center for losses incurred in Florida, both while it is
a hurricane and through subsequent downgrades. For the contract year June 1, 2009 to May 31, 2010,
UPCIC purchased the traditional FHCF coverage and did not purchase the Temporary Increase in
Coverage Limit Option offered to insurers by the FHCF. As of December 31, 2009 the estimated
coverage is 90% of $1,038,999,659 in excess of $392,807,984. The estimated premium for this
coverage is $58,819,440.
Also at June 1, 2009, the FHCF made available, and UPCIC obtained, $10,000,000 of additional
catastrophe excess of loss coverage with one free reinstatement of coverage to carriers qualified
as Limited Apportionment Companies or companies that participated in the Insurance Capital Build-Up
Incentive Program (the ICBUI Program) offered by the FHCF, such as UPCIC. This particular layer
of coverage at June 1, 2009 is $10,000,000 in excess of $28,200,000. The premium for this coverage
is $5,000,000.
On October 30, 2009, the SBA published its most recent estimate of the FHCFs loss reimbursement
capacity in the Florida Administrative Weekly. The SBA estimated that the FHCFs total loss
reimbursement capacity under current market conditions for the 2009 2010 contract year is
projected to be $18.998 billion over the 12-month period following the estimate. The SBA also
referred to its report entitled, October 2009 Estimated Claims Paying Capacity Report (Report)
as providing greater detail regarding the FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity. The Report estimated
that the FHCFs minimum 12-month loss reimbursement capacity is $14.998 billion and its maximum
12-month loss reimbursement capacity is $21.998 billion. UPCIC elected to purchase the FHCF
Mandatory Layer of Coverage for the 2009 2010 contract year, which corresponds to FHCF loss
reimbursement capacity of $17.175 billion. By law, the FHCFs obligation to reimburse insurers is
limited to its actual claims-paying capacity. In addition, the cost of UPCICs reinsurance program
may increase should UPCIC deem it necessary to purchase additional private market reinsurance due
to reduced estimates of the FHCFs loss reimbursement capacity.
The total cost of UPCICs private catastrophe reinsurance program effective June 1, 2009 through
May 31, 2010 is $155,258,800 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $77,629,400, and the quota share
reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. The total cost of UPCICs private catastrophe reinsurance
layer effective June 12, 2009 through May 31, 2010 is $17,500,000 which is eliminated in
consolidation. In addition, UPCIC purchases reinstatement premium protection as described above
which amounts to $22,312,747. The cost of subsequent event catastrophe reinsurance is $15,740,000.
63
The estimated premium UPCIC plans to cede to the FHCF for the 2009 hurricane season is $58,819,440
of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $29,409,720, and the quota share reinsurers cost is the remaining
50%. UPCIC is also participating in the additional coverage option for Limited Apportionment
Companies or companies that participated in the ICBUI Program, the premium for which is $5,000,000,
of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $2,500,000, and the quota share reinsurers cost is the remaining
50%.
Effective June 1, 2009 through December 31, 2009, the Company obtained $60,000,000 of coverage via
a catastrophe risk-linked transaction contract in the event UPCICs catastrophe coverage is
exhausted. The total cost of the Companys risk-linked transaction contract is $11,100,000.
UPCIC is responsible for losses related to catastrophic events with incurred losses in excess of
coverage provided by UPCICs reinsurance program and for losses that otherwise are not covered by
the reinsurance program, which could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the Companys
business, financial condition and results of operations. As of June 30, 2009, UPCIC had coverage
to approximately the 114-year PML, modeled using AIR CLASIC/2 v.10.0, long term, without demand
surge and without loss amplification. PML is a general concept applied in the insurance industry
for defining high loss scenarios that should be considered when underwriting insurance risk.
Catastrophe models produce loss estimates that are qualified in terms of dollars and probabilities.
Probability of exceedance or the probability that the actual loss level will exceed a particular
threshold is a standard catastrophe model output. For example, the 100-year PML represents a 1.00%
Annual Probability of Exceedance (the 114-year PML represents a 0.877% Annual Probability of
Exceedance). It is estimated that the 100-year PML is likely to be equaled or exceeded in one year
out of 100 on average, or 1 percent of the time. It is the 99th percentile of the annual loss
distribution.
Amounts recoverable from reinsurers are estimated in accordance with the reinsurance contract.
Reinsurance premiums, losses and LAE are accounted for on bases consistent with those used in
accounting for the original policies issued and the terms of the reinsurance contracts.
2008 Reinsurance Program
Quota Share
Effective June 1, 2008, UPCIC entered into a quota share reinsurance treaty with Everest Re. Under
the quota share treaty, through May 31, 2009, UPCIC ceded 50% of its gross written premiums, losses
and LAE for policies with coverage for wind risk, with a ceding commission payable to UPCIC equal
to 31% of ceded gross written premiums. In addition, the quota share treaty has a limitation for
any one occurrence of 55% of gross premiums earned, not to exceed $150,000,000 (of which UPCICs
net liability in a first event scenario is $70,000,000, in a second event scenario is $14,800,000
and in a third event scenario is $15,000,000) and a limitation from losses arising out of events
that are assigned a catastrophe serial number by the PCS office of 164% of gross premiums earned,
not to exceed $450,000,000.
Excess Per Risk
Effective June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009, UPCIC entered into a multiple line excess per risk
agreement with various reinsurers. Under the multiple line excess per risk agreement, UPCIC
obtained coverage of $1,300,000 in excess of $500,000 ultimate net loss for each risk and each
property loss, and $1,000,000 in excess of $300,000 for each casualty loss. A $7,800,000 aggregate
limit applies to the term of this agreement. Additionally under this agreement, no property claim
shall be made until UPCIC has retained the first $1,300,000 of potential recovery.
Effective June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009, UPCIC entered into a property per risk excess
agreement covering ex-wind only policies. Under the property per risk excess agreement, UPCIC
obtained coverage of $300,000 in excess of $200,000 for each property loss. A $2,100,000 aggregate
limit applies to the term of the contract.
The total cost of UPCICs multiple line excess reinsurance program effective June 1, 2008 through
May 31, 2009 is $2,058,270 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $1,029,135, and the quota share
reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. The total cost of UPCICs property per risk reinsurance
program effective June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009 is $394,562.
Excess Catastrophe
64
Effective June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009, under an excess catastrophe contract, UPCIC obtained
catastrophe coverage of $399,000,000 in excess of $150,000,000 covering certain loss occurrences
including hurricanes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Layer |
|
Second Layer |
|
Third Layer |
Coverage |
|
$140,000,000 in excess of $150,000,000 each loss occurrence (placed 100%) |
|
$134,000,000 in excess of $290,000,000 each loss occurrence (placed 100%) |
|
$125,000,000 in excess of $424,000,000 each loss occurrence (placed 100%) |
Deposit premium |
|
$48,300,000 |
|
$24,120,000 |
|
$14,375,000 |
Minimum premium |
|
$38,640,000 |
|
$19,296,000 |
|
$11,500,000 |
Premium rate -% of
total insured value |
|
0.050837% |
|
0.025387% |
|
0.015130% |
Loss occurrence is defined as all individual losses directly occasioned by any one disaster,
accident or loss or series of disasters, accidents or losses arising out of one event, which occurs
in the State of Florida. The contract contains a provision for one reinstatement in the event
coverage is exhausted. An additional premium will be calculated pro rata as to amount and 100% as
to time.
Effective June 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009, UPCIC purchased a reinstatement premium protection
contract which reimburses UPCIC for its cost to reinstate the catastrophe coverage of the first
$274,000,000 in excess of $150,000,000.
Also, effective June 1, 2008, UPCIC also obtained subsequent catastrophe event excess of loss
reinsurance to cover certain levels of UPCICs net retention through two catastrophe events
including hurricanes, as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2nd Event |
|
3rd Event |
Coverage |
|
$110,400,000 in excess of $39,600,000 each loss occurrence subject to an otherwise recoverable amount of $110,400,000 (placed 50%) |
|
$120,000,000 in excess of $30,000,000 each loss occurrence subject to an otherwise recoverable amount of $240,000,000 (placed 50%) |
Deposit premium (100%) |
|
$16,560,000 |
|
$7,800,000 |
Minimum premium (100%) |
|
$13,248,000 |
|
$6,240,000 |
Premium rate -% of
total insured value |
|
0.017430% |
|
0.008210% |
UPCIC also obtained coverage from the FHCF, which is administered by the SBA. Under the
reimbursement agreement, FHCF would reimburse UPCIC, with respect to each loss occurrence during
the contract year for 90% of the ultimate loss paid by UPCIC in excess of its retention plus 5% of
the reimbursed losses to cover loss adjustment expenses. A covered event means any one storm
declared to be a hurricane by the National Hurricane Center for losses incurred in Florida, both
while it is a hurricane and through subsequent downgrades. For the contract year June 1, 2008 to
May 31, 2009, the SBA made available through the 2007 passage of House Bill 1A an additional $12
billion (Temporary Increase in Coverage Limit TICL) of Florida Hurricane Catastrophe Fund
coverage for the 2008 wind season. UPCIC purchased both the traditional FHCF coverage as well as
the TICL FHCF coverage for the contract year June 1, 2008 to May 31, 2009. As of December 31,
2008, the estimated coverage is 90% of $1,514,348,584 in excess of $305,438,476. The premium for
this coverage is $59,077,813.
Also at June 1, 2008, the FHCF made available, and UPCIC obtained, $10,000,000 of additional
catastrophe excess of loss coverage with one free reinstatement of coverage to carriers qualified
as Limited Apportionment Companies or companies that participated in the UCBUI Program offered by
the FHCF, such as UPCIC. This particular layer of coverage at June 1, 2008 is $10,000,000 in
excess of $29,600,000. The premium for this coverage is $5,000,000.
65
The total cost of UPCICs underlying catastrophe private reinsurance program effective June 1, 2008
through May 31, 2009 is $86,795,000 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $43,397,500, and the quota
share reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. In addition, UPCIC purchases reinstatement premium
protection as described above which amounts to $12,266,483. The cost of subsequent event
catastrophe reinsurance is $12,180,000. The estimated premium UPCIC plans to cede to the FHCF for
the 2008 hurricane season is $59,077,813 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $29,538,907, and the
quota share reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%. UPCIC is also participating in the additional
coverage option for Limited Apportionment Companies or companies that participated in the ICBUI
Program, the premium for which is $5,000,000, of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $2,500,000, and the
quota share reinsurers cost is the remaining 50%.
Effective June 1, 2008 through December 31, 2008, the Company obtained $60,000,000 of coverage via
a catastrophe risk-linked transaction contract in the event UPCICs catastrophe coverage is
exhausted or UPCIC is unable to successfully collect from the FHCF for losses involving the
Temporary Increase in Coverage Limits. The total cost of the Companys risk-linked transaction
contract is $10,260,000.
Effective July 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009, under an excess catastrophe contract, UPCIC obtained
an additional $90,000,000 of catastrophe coverage via a new top layer of 90% of $100,000,000 in
excess of $549,000,000 covering certain loss occurrences including hurricanes. The contract
contains a provision for one reinstatement in the event coverage is exhausted; additional premium
is calculated pro rata as to amount and 100% as to time. The total cost of this new top layer is
$7,200,000 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $3,600,000, and the quota share reinsurers cost is the
remaining 50%.
Also effective July 1, 2008 through May 31, 2009, UPCIC secured an additional $80,000,000 of third
event catastrophe coverage via a new layer of 80% of $100,000,000. The total cost of this new
layer is $4,000,000 of which UPCICs cost is 50%, or $2,000,000, and the quota share reinsurers
cost is the remaining 50%.
UPCIC is responsible for losses related to catastrophic events with incurred losses in excess of
coverage provided by UPCICs reinsurance program and for losses that otherwise are not covered by
the reinsurance program, which could have a material adverse effect on UPCICs and the Companys
business, financial condition and results of operations. At the start of the hurricane season on
June 1, 2008, UPCIC had coverage to approximately the 133-year PML, modeled using AIR CLASIC/2
v.9.5, long term, without demand surge and without loss amplification. With the additional
catastrophic coverage via the new top layer effective July 1, 2008, UPCIC would have had coverage
to approximately the 145-year PML, modeled using AIR CLASIC/2 v.9.0, long term, without demand
surge and without loss amplification. PML is a general concept applied in the insurance industry
for defining high loss scenarios that should be considered when underwriting insurance risk.
Catastrophe models produce loss estimates that are qualified in terms of dollars and probabilities.
Probability of exceedance or the probability that the actual loss level will exceed a particular
threshold is a standard catastrophe model output. For example, the 100-year PML represents a 1.00%
Annual Probability of Exceedance (the 133-year PML represents a 0.752% Annual Probability of
Exceedance and the 145-year PML represents a 0.690% Annual Probability of Exceedance). It is
estimated that the 100-year PML is likely to be equaled or exceeded in one year out of 100 on
average, or 1 percent of the time. It is the 99th percentile of the annual loss distribution.
Amounts recoverable from reinsurers are estimated in accordance with the reinsurance contract.
Reinsurance premiums, losses and LAE are accounted for on bases consistent with those used in
accounting for the original policies issued and the terms of the reinsurance contracts.
NOTE 4 INVESTMENTS
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Companys investments consisted primarily of cash and cash
equivalents, of $147,585,464 and $192,924,291, respectively and investment securities with carrying
values of $224,532,404 and $114,797,010 respectively.
Major sources of net investment income, comprised primarily of interest and dividends, are
summarized as follows:
66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
99,697 |
|
|
$ |
312,317 |
|
|
$ |
3,951,161 |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
968,905 |
|
|
|
1,269,216 |
|
|
|
64,213 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
557,698 |
|
|
|
650,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment income |
|
|
1,626,300 |
|
|
|
2,232,272 |
|
|
|
4,015,374 |
|
Less investment expenses |
|
|
(634,065 |
) |
|
|
(778,673 |
) |
|
|
(294,345 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net investment income |
|
$ |
992,235 |
|
|
$ |
1,453,599 |
|
|
$ |
3,721,029 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table shows the realized gains and losses for investments during the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009. There were no realized gains and losses for investments during the year
ended December 31, 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended |
|
|
For the Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Realized |
|
|
Proceeds |
|
|
Realized |
|
|
Proceeds |
|
|
|
Gains (Losses) |
|
|
(Fair Value at Sale) |
|
|
Gains(Losses) |
|
|
(Fair Value at Sale) |
|
Debt securities |
|
$ |
5,120,559 |
|
|
$ |
472,699,451 |
|
|
$ |
5,542,936 |
|
|
$ |
278,212,228 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
26,701,193 |
|
|
|
198,010,939 |
|
|
|
26,722,120 |
|
|
|
121,930,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
31,821,752 |
|
|
|
670,710,390 |
|
|
|
32,265,056 |
|
|
|
400,142,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities |
|
|
(467,325 |
) |
|
|
52,521,675 |
|
|
|
(8,248 |
) |
|
|
20,820,861 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
(3,610,804 |
) |
|
|
24,288,208 |
|
|
|
(8,081,763 |
) |
|
|
31,964,985 |
|
Other Investments |
|
|
(52,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
(4,130,129 |
) |
|
|
76,809,883 |
|
|
|
(8,090,011 |
) |
|
|
52,785,846 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net |
|
$ |
27,691,623 |
|
|
$ |
747,520,273 |
|
|
$ |
24,175,045 |
|
|
$ |
452,928,142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following tables summarize, by type, the Companys investment securities as of December 31,
2010 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 (Trading) |
|
|
December 31, 2009 (Available for Sale) |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Percent of Total |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Percent of Total |
|
Debt Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US government agency obligations |
|
$ |
130,116,007 |
|
|
|
57.9 |
% |
|
$ |
41,389,008 |
|
|
|
36.1 |
% |
Equity Securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
25,751,909 |
|
|
|
11.5 |
% |
|
|
7,597,419 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
% |
Energy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
256,053 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
Other |
|
|
362,520 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
221,760 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
% |
Exchange-traded and mutual funds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
42,209,279 |
|
|
|
18.8 |
% |
|
|
38,753,742 |
|
|
|
33.8 |
% |
Agriculture |
|
|
14,876,584 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
% |
|
|
11,754,630 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
% |
Energy |
|
|
5,559,296 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
% |
|
|
3,306,815 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
% |
Indices |
|
|
4,613,105 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
% |
|
|
7,963,094 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
% |
Other |
|
|
1,043,704 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
% |
|
|
3,554,489 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
94,416,397 |
|
|
|
42.1 |
% |
|
|
73,408,002 |
|
|
|
63.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities |
|
$ |
224,532,404 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
114,797,010 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67
All investment securities as of December 31, 2010 were held by the Company for trading and all
investment securities as of December 31, 2009 were available for sale.
The Company is required by various state laws and regulations to keep certain securities on deposit
in depository accounts with the states in which we do business. As of December 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, securities having a fair value of $6,010,612 and $5,723,402, respectively were
on deposit. These laws and regulations govern not only the amount, but also the type if security
that is eligible for deposit. In all states the deposits are limited to fixed maturity securities.
Trading
During the three-month period ended September 30, 2010, the Company evaluated the trading activity
in its investment portfolio, its investing strategy, and its overall investment program. As a
result of this evaluation, the Company reclassified its available-for-sale portfolio as a trading
portfolio effective July 1, 2010. Net unrealized losses of $656,307 were reflected as a transfer
as of July 1, 2010, and recognized in earnings and included under the caption Unrealized Gains on
Investments in the Consolidated Statement of Income. The net unrealized loss of $656,307 is
comprised of $1,229,737 unrealized losses offset by $573,430 of unrealized gains.
During the six-month period ended December 31, 2010, the market value of the Companys trading
portfolio outstanding at December 31, 2010, excluding amounts reflected as a transfer from the
available-for-sale portfolio, increased by $2,669,321 before income taxes. The increase in market
value was recognized in earnings and also included in unrealized gains on investments in the
Consolidated Statement of Income. The Company will continue to record future changes in the market
value of its trading portfolio directly to earnings. The total net unrealized gains on investments,
held in the Companys trading portfolio at December 31, 2010 was $2,013,014.
Available- for- sale
During the year ended December 31, 2009, the Company sold US Treasury Notes, originally intended to
be held to maturity, and purchased US Treasury Inflation Index Bonds in order to reduce the effects
of inflation on the Companys overall investment portfolio. These US Treasury Notes had a carrying
value of $4,170,864, were sold for $4,244,851 and a gain of $73,897 was recognized. The Company
reclassified its held to maturity securities being carried at an amortized cost of $57,773,720 to
available for sale securities and recorded net unrealized losses of $85,965 concurrently with the
sale of the US Treasury Notes.
The following table sets forth the amortized cost, gross gains, gross losses and estimated fair
value of the Companys investment securities portfolio available for sale as of December 31, 2009.
The Company had no investment securities classified as available for sale as of December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Amortized Cost / |
|
|
Gross Unrealized |
|
|
Gross Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Estimated Fair Value |
|
Debt securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US government and agency obligations |
|
$ |
42,296,727 |
|
|
$ |
37,623 |
|
|
$ |
(945,342 |
) |
|
$ |
41,389,008 |
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
7,733,822 |
|
|
|
190,079 |
|
|
|
(326,483 |
) |
|
|
7,597,418 |
|
Energy |
|
|
237,153 |
|
|
|
18,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
256,054 |
|
Other |
|
|
155,696 |
|
|
|
66,064 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
221,760 |
|
Exchange-traded and mutual funds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
36,520,270 |
|
|
|
2,521,237 |
|
|
|
(287,765 |
) |
|
|
38,753,742 |
|
Agriculture |
|
|
10,920,621 |
|
|
|
834,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,754,630 |
|
Energy |
|
|
3,141,106 |
|
|
|
165,708 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,306,814 |
|
Indices |
|
|
9,712,302 |
|
|
|
43,007 |
|
|
|
(1,792,215 |
) |
|
|
7,963,094 |
|
Other |
|
|
3,115,062 |
|
|
|
439,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,554,488 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
71,536,032 |
|
|
|
4,278,431 |
|
|
|
(2,406,463 |
) |
|
|
73,408,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities |
|
$ |
113,832,759 |
|
|
$ |
4,316,054 |
|
|
$ |
(3,351,805 |
) |
|
$ |
114,797,008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
The table below reflects the Companys unrealized investment security losses by investment class,
aged for length of time in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized Investment Losses |
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or longer |
|
|
|
Number of issues |
|
|
Fair value |
|
|
Unrealized losses |
|
|
Number of issues |
|
|
Fair value |
|
|
Unrealized losses |
|
Debt securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US government and agency obligations |
|
|
4 |
|
|
$ |
39,246,052 |
|
|
$ |
(945,342 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
4,166,010 |
|
|
|
(326,483 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange trades and mutual funds: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Metals and mining |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
9,613,290 |
|
|
|
(287,765 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Indices |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7,015,844 |
|
|
|
(1,792,215 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
20,795,144 |
|
|
|
(2,406,463 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
31 |
|
|
$ |
60,041,196 |
|
|
$ |
3,351,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized losses on debt securities available for sale, are principally related to rising interest
rates and changes in credit spreads. Unrealized losses on equity securities are primarily related
to equity market fluctuations. The Company has performed an evaluation of its investment portfolio
and concluded that it holds no securities for which an other-than-temporary impairment adjustment
to carrying value is warranted.
The Company has made an assessment of its invested assets for fair value measurement as further
described in Note 17 Fair Value Measurements.
NOTE 5 PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
Property and equipment, as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, consisted of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Land |
|
$ |
1,287,000 |
|
|
$ |
270,000 |
|
Building |
|
|
1,410,000 |
|
|
|
1,410,000 |
|
Capital Improvements |
|
|
2,116,612 |
|
|
|
2,157,389 |
|
Computers |
|
|
155,782 |
|
|
|
54,184 |
|
Furniture |
|
|
930,485 |
|
|
|
513,579 |
|
Automobiles and other vehicles |
|
|
1,105,680 |
|
|
|
1,080,886 |
|
Software |
|
|
1,374,366 |
|
|
|
1,239,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost |
|
|
8,379,925 |
|
|
|
6,725,318 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(2,973,159 |
) |
|
|
(2,189,567 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
$ |
5,406,766 |
|
|
$ |
4,535,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment was $831,159, $490,059 and $480,313 during
2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
The Company realized the following on the sale of property and equipment: a net loss of $12,891 in
2010, a net gain of $130,119, and a net loss of $137,571 in 2008.
NOTE 6 DEFERRED POLICY ACQUISITION COSTS
69
The components of deferred policy acquisition costs (DPAC) and deferred ceding commission (DCC)
for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
DPAC, beginning of year |
|
$ |
43,971,286 |
|
|
$ |
40,155,150 |
|
|
$ |
37,018,747 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized Costs |
|
|
100,615,240 |
|
|
|
88,333,192 |
|
|
|
79,438,929 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of DPAC |
|
|
94,458,987 |
|
|
|
84,517,056 |
|
|
|
76,302,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DPAC, end of year |
|
$ |
50,127,539 |
|
|
$ |
43,971,286 |
|
|
$ |
40,155,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DCC, beginning of year |
|
$ |
34,506,662 |
|
|
$ |
39,747,203 |
|
|
$ |
39,141,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceding Commissions Written |
|
|
82,567,947 |
|
|
|
68,566,674 |
|
|
|
78,654,864 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned Ceding Commissions |
|
|
76,392,749 |
|
|
|
73,807,215 |
|
|
|
78,048,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DCC, end of year |
|
$ |
40,681,860 |
|
|
$ |
34,506,662 |
|
|
$ |
39,747,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DPAC (DCC), net, beginning of year |
|
$ |
9,464,624 |
|
|
$ |
407,946 |
|
|
$ |
(2,122,269 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized Costs, net |
|
|
18,047,293 |
|
|
|
19,766,518 |
|
|
|
784,064 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of DPAC (DCC), net |
|
|
18,066,238 |
|
|
|
10,709,840 |
|
|
|
(1,746,151 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DPAC (DCC), net, end of year |
|
$ |
9,445,679 |
|
|
$ |
9,464,624 |
|
|
$ |
407,946 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 7 LIABILITY FOR UNPAID LOSSES AND LOSS ADJUSTMENT EXPENSES
As described in Note 2, UPCIC establishes liabilities for unpaid losses and loss adjustment
expenses on reported and unreported claims of insured losses. These liability estimates are based
on known facts and interpretation of factors such as claim payment patterns, loss payments, pending
levels of unpaid claims, product mix and industry experience. The establishment of appropriate
liabilities, including liabilities for catastrophes, is an inherently uncertain process. UPCIC
regularly updates its estimates as new facts become known and further events occur which may impact
the resolution of unsettled claims.
The level of catastrophe loss experienced in any year cannot be predicted and could be material to
results of operations and financial position. UPCICs policyholders are concentrated in South
Florida, which is periodically subject to adverse weather conditions, such as hurricanes and
tropical storms. During the twelve-month periods ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, UPCIC did
not experience any catastrophic events. UPCICs in-force policyholder coverage for windstorm
exposures as of December 31, 2010 was approximately $126.8 billion. UPCIC continuously evaluates
alternative business strategies to more effectively manage its exposure to catastrophe losses,
including the maintenance of catastrophic reinsurance coverage as discussed in Note 3.
Management believes that the liabilities for claims and claims expense as of December 31, 2010 are
appropriately established in the aggregate and adequate to cover the ultimate cost of reported and
unreported claims arising from losses which had occurred by that date. However, if losses exceeded
direct loss reserve estimates there could be a material adverse effect on the Companys financial
statements. Also, if there are regulatory initiatives, legislative
70
enactments or case law precedents which change the basis for policy coverage, in any of these events, there could be an
effect on direct loss reserve estimates having a material adverse effect on the Companys financial
statements.
Activity in the liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses is summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Balance at beginning of year |
|
$ |
127,197,753 |
|
|
$ |
87,947,774 |
|
Less reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
(62,900,913 |
) |
|
|
(43,384,469 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance at beginning of year |
|
|
64,296,840 |
|
|
|
44,563,305 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incurred related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current year |
|
|
107,424,191 |
|
|
|
97,630,002 |
|
Prior years |
|
|
5,931,284 |
|
|
|
8,503,133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total incurred |
|
|
113,355,475 |
|
|
|
106,133,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current year |
|
|
54,216,243 |
|
|
|
52,388,374 |
|
Prior years |
|
|
43,621,652 |
|
|
|
34,011,226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total paid |
|
|
97,837,896 |
|
|
|
86,399,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net balance at end of year |
|
|
79,814,419 |
|
|
|
64,296,840 |
|
Plus reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
79,114,418 |
|
|
|
62,900,913 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year |
|
$ |
158,928,837 |
|
|
$ |
127,197,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a result of changes in estimates of insured events in prior years, the provision of losses and
LAE, net of related reinsurance recoverables increased by $5,931,284 and $8,503,133 in 2010 and
2009, respectively, principally as a result of actual loss development on prior year
non-catastrophe losses during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009. The Company has created a
proprietary claims analysis tool (P2P) to analyze and calculate reserves. P2P is a custom built
application by UPCIC that aggregates, analyzes and forecasts reserves based on historical data that
spans more than a decade. It identifies historical claims data using same like kind and quality
variables that exist in present claims and sets forth appropriate, more accurate reserves on
current claims. P2P is reviewed by UPCIC management on a weekly basis in reviewing the topography
of existing and incoming claims. P2P will be analyzed at each quarters end and adjustments to
reserves are made at an aggregate level when appropriate.
P2P was initially used for 2010 third quarter reserve analysis resulting in an increase in 2010
loss year reserves. Further refinements were put into place in 2010 fourth quarter which included
inflation adjustments for past claims into 2010 dollars (inflation guard). P2P was reviewed by an
independent third party for data integrity and system reliability. The program was used for 2010
fourth quarter analysis and supported the companys independent actuarys best figures for
development in prior years. The system indicated reserves for the 2010 loss year that exceeded
actuarys best figures and system figures were used at year end. This program will be used for
quarterly reviews on an ongoing basis.
NOTE 8 LOANS PAYABLE AND LONG-TERM DEBT
Surplus Note
On November 9, 2006, UPCIC entered into a $25.0 million surplus note with the SBA under the ICBUI
Program. Under the ICBUI program, which was implemented by the Florida Legislature to encourage
insurance companies to write additional residential insurance coverage in Florida, the SBA matched
UPCICs funds of $25.0 million that were
71
earmarked for participation in the program. The surplus note brings the current capital and
surplus of UPCIC to approximately $117.8 million as of December 31, 2010.
The surplus note has a twenty-year term and accrues interest at a rate equivalent to the 10-year
U.S. Treasury Bond rate, adjusted quarterly based on the 10-year Constant Maturity Treasury rate.
For the first three years of the term of the surplus note, UPCIC was required to pay interest only.
Any payment of principal or interest by UPCIC on the surplus note must be approved by the
Commissioner of the OIR. Aggregate principal payments of $1,470,588 and $367,647 were made during
the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the balances due under the surplus note are shown in the
Companys Consolidated Balance Sheets as Long-Term Debt with carrying values of $23,161,764 and
$24,632,353, respectively.
Repayments of principal are estimated to be as follows as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
1,470,588 |
|
2012 |
|
|
1,470,588 |
|
2013 |
|
|
1,470,588 |
|
2014 |
|
|
1,470,588 |
|
2015 |
|
|
1,470,588 |
|
|
|
|
|
Thereafter |
|
|
15,808,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
23,161,764 |
|
|
|
|
|
In May 2008, the Florida Legislature passed a law providing participants in the Program an
opportunity to amend the terms of their surplus notes based on law changes. The new law contains
methods for calculating compliance with the writing ratio requirements that are more favorable to
UPCIC than prior law and the prior terms of the existing surplus note. On November 6, 2008, UPCIC
and the SBA executed an addendum to the surplus note (the addendum) that reflects these law
changes. The terms of the addendum were effective July 1, 2008. In addition to other less
significant changes, the addendum modifies the definitions of Minimum Required Surplus, Minimum
Writing Ratio, Surplus, and Gross Written Premium, respectively, as defined in the original surplus
note.
Prior to the effective date of the addendum, UPCIC was in compliance with each of the loans
covenants as implemented by rules promulgated by the SBA. UPCIC currently remains in compliance
with each of the loans covenants as implemented by rules promulgated by the SBA. An event of
default will occur under the surplus note, as amended, if UPCIC: (i) defaults in the payment of the
surplus note; (ii) drops below a net written premium to surplus of 1:1 for three consecutive
quarters beginning January 1, 2010 and drops below a gross written premium to surplus ratio of 3:1
for three consecutive quarters beginning January 1, 2010; (iii) fails to submit quarterly filings
to the OIR; (iv) fails to maintain at least $50 million of surplus during the term of the surplus
note, except for certain situations; (v) misuses proceeds of the surplus note; (vi) makes any
misrepresentations in the application for the program; (vii) pays any dividend when principal or
interest payments are past due under the surplus note; or (viii) fails to maintain a level of
surplus sufficient to cover in excess of UPCICs 1-in-100 year probable maximum loss as determined
by a hurricane loss model accepted by the Florida Commission on Hurricane Loss Projection
Methodology as certified by the OIR annually.
The original surplus note provided for increases in interest rates for failure to meet the Minimum
Writing Ratio. Under the terms of the surplus note agreement, at December 31, 2007, the interest
rate on the note was increased by 450 basis points. As of June 30, 2008, the additional interest
rate on the note was decreased from 450 basis points to 25 basis points. Under the terms of the
surplus note, as amended, the net written premium to surplus requirement and gross written premium
to surplus requirement have been modified. As of December 31, 2010, UPCICs net written premium to
surplus ratio and gross written premium to surplus ratio were in excess of the required minimums
and, therefore, UPCIC was not subject to increases in interest rates.
Finance Facility
In November 2007, the Company commenced offering premium finance services through Atlas Premium
Finance Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary. To fund its operations, Atlas agreed to a Sale and
Assignment Agreement with Flatiron Capital Corp., a funding partner to the commercial property and
casualty insurance industry owned by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. The agreement provides for Atlas sale
of eligible premium finance receivables to Flatiron.
72
In September 2009, Atlas received notification that, effective September 27, 2010, Flatiron would
not be renewing the funding and servicing agreement with Atlas. Flatiron stated in the notice to
Atlas that its business environment and goals had changed and it had made a strategic decision to
exit this particular business activity. Accordingly, on September 17, 2010, Atlas paid off its
loan with Flatiron in full and the parties terminated the Sale and Assignment Agreement and other
related agreements. The Company recorded a corresponding loan to Atlas which is eliminated in
consolidation.
Interest Expense
Interest expense, comprised primarily of interest on the surplus note, was $862,108, $797,934 and
$1,581,722 for the twelve months ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
NOTE 9 INCOME TAXES
The following table reconciles the statutory federal income tax rate to the Companys effective tax
rate for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Statutory federal income tax rate |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
Increases (decreases) resulting from: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disallowed meals & entertainment |
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
0.3 |
% |
|
|
0.1 |
% |
Disallowed compensation |
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State income tax, net of federal tax
benefit (1) |
|
|
3.6 |
% |
|
|
3.6 |
% |
|
|
3.6 |
% |
Other, net |
|
|
0.4 |
% |
|
|
-1.3 |
% |
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
40.6 |
% |
|
|
37.6 |
% |
|
|
39.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Included in income tax is State of Florida income tax at a statutory tax rate of 5.5%. |
Deferred income taxes as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 represent the temporary differences
between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of the Companys assets and liabilities.
The tax effects of temporary differences are as follows:
73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Deferred income tax
assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unearned premiums |
|
$ |
8,274,231 |
|
|
$ |
6,023,587 |
|
Advanced premiums |
|
|
1,459,933 |
|
|
|
1,266,152 |
|
Unpaid losses |
|
|
2,193,958 |
|
|
|
1,836,061 |
|
Regulatory
assessments |
|
|
182,198 |
|
|
|
1,605,884 |
|
Executive
compensation |
|
|
1,311,946 |
|
|
|
509,545 |
|
Stock option expense |
|
|
3,466,936 |
|
|
|
3,037,961 |
|
Accrued wages |
|
|
357,259 |
|
|
|
423,190 |
|
Allowance for
uncollectible
receivables |
|
|
42,994 |
|
|
|
1,042,228 |
|
Additional tax
basis of securities |
|
|
171,852 |
|
|
|
140,878 |
|
Restricted stock
grant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,882 |
|
Recognition of OTTI |
|
|
306,897 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred
income tax assets |
|
|
17,768,204 |
|
|
|
15,899,244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income tax
liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred policy
acquisition costs,
net |
|
|
(3,643,671 |
) |
|
|
(3,650,979 |
) |
Market value gains
on trading
securities |
|
|
(676,574 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains on
investments |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(353,976 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred
income tax
liabilities |
|
|
(4,320,251 |
) |
|
|
(4,004,955 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred income
tax asset |
|
$ |
13,447,953 |
|
|
$ |
11,894,289 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A valuation allowance is deemed unnecessary as of December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009,
respectively, because management believes it is probable that the Company will generate substantial
taxable income sufficient to realize the tax benefits associated with the net deferred income tax
asset shown above in the near future.
Liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits, if any, are recorded in accordance with issued FASB
guidance on Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes. The Company recognizes accruals for
interest and penalties, if any, related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense.
The 2006 consolidated federal income tax return for the Company and its subsidiaries was examined
by the Internal Revenue Service in 2009. The audit was completed and settled in October 2009 with
no major issues. The combination of positive and negative adjustments resulted in an agreed upon
assessment of $3,144, which was paid by the Company in January 2010.
The Company filed a consolidated federal income tax return for the fiscal years ended December 31,
2009, 2008, and 2007 and intends to file the same for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010. The
agreements between the Company and its statutory subsidiaries provide that they will incur income
taxes based on a computation of taxes as if they were stand-alone taxpayers. Tax years that remain
open for purposes of examination of its income tax liability due to taxing authorities, include the
years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007.
NOTE 10 STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
Cumulative Convertible Preferred Stock
As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had shares outstanding of Series A Cumulative
and Series M Convertible Preferred Stock. Each share of Series A Preferred Stock is convertible by
the Company into 2.5 shares of Common Stock. Each share of Series M Preferred Stock is convertible
by the Company into 1.25 shares of Common Stock. The Series A Preferred Stock pays a cumulative
dividend of $.25 per share per quarter. During 2010 and 2009, respectively, the Company declared
and paid aggregate dividends of $19,950 and $27,450 on the Companys Series A Preferred Stock and
Series M Preferred Stock.
74
The following table provides information for each series of convertible preferred stock issued by
the Company as of December 31, 2010 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 |
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Series A |
|
|
Series M |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Series A |
|
|
Series M |
|
|
Total |
|
Shares |
|
|
19,950 |
|
|
|
87,740 |
|
|
|
107,690 |
|
|
|
19,950 |
|
|
|
88,690 |
|
|
|
108,640 |
|
Conversion factor |
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
Number of common
shares resulting
if converted |
|
|
49,875 |
|
|
|
109,675 |
|
|
|
159,550 |
|
|
|
49,875 |
|
|
|
110,863 |
|
|
|
160,738 |
|
During the year ended December 31, 2010, shareholders converted 950 shares of Series M Preferred
Stock into 1,187 shares of Common Stock. During the year ended December 31, 2009, shareholders
converted 30,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock into 75,000 shares of Common Stock.
Common Stock
The following table summarizes the activity relating to shares of the Companys Common Stock during
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued Shares |
|
|
Treasury Shares |
|
|
Shares Held in Trust |
|
|
Outstanding Shares |
|
Balance, as of January 1, 2008 |
|
|
39,307,103 |
|
|
|
(394,374 |
) |
|
|
(2,900,000 |
) |
|
|
36,012,729 |
|
Warrants exercised |
|
|
600,000 |
|
|
|
(81,081 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
518,919 |
|
Options exercised |
|
|
916,000 |
|
|
|
(1,390,575 |
) |
|
|
1,994,000 |
|
|
|
1,519,425 |
|
Shares cancelled |
|
|
(965,084 |
) |
|
|
965,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock grant |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
Repurchase of shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(808,901 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(808,901 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, as of December 31, 2008 |
|
|
40,158,019 |
|
|
|
(1,709,847 |
) |
|
|
(906,000 |
) |
|
|
37,542,172 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock conversion |
|
|
75,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75,000 |
|
Options exercised |
|
|
20,000 |
|
|
|
(137,407 |
) |
|
|
275,000 |
|
|
|
157,593 |
|
Shares cancelled |
|
|
(38,135 |
) |
|
|
38,135 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, as of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
40,214,884 |
|
|
|
(1,809,119 |
) |
|
|
(631,000 |
) |
|
|
37,774,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock conversion |
|
|
1,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
Options exercised |
|
|
1,995,206 |
|
|
|
(1,314,160 |
) |
|
|
631,000 |
|
|
|
1,312,046 |
|
Shares cancelled |
|
|
(2,104,526 |
) |
|
|
2,104,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted stock grant |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, as of December 31, 2010 |
|
|
40,406,751 |
|
|
|
(1,018,753 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,387,998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends Declared
During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company declared dividends on its
outstanding shares of common stock to its shareholders of record as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
4,699,926 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
3,916,724 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
3,916,724 |
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
| |
|
| |
First Quarter |
|
$ |
0.22 |
|
|
$ |
8,268,278 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
4,516,461 |
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
|
$ |
7,528,808 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
|
|
First Quarter |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
3,791,617 |
|
Second Quarter |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Third Quarter |
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
3,724,217 |
|
Fourth Quarter |
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
|
$ |
7,448,435 |
|
Company Stock Repurchase
On June 25, 2008, the Companys Board of Directors authorized the Company to repurchase up to
$3,000,000 of its shares of outstanding Common Stock. Under the repurchase program, management was
authorized to repurchase shares through December 31, 2008, with block trades permitted, in open
market purchases or in privately negotiated transactions at prevailing market prices in compliance
with applicable securities laws and other legal requirements. To facilitate repurchases, the
Company made purchases pursuant to a Rule 10b5-1 plan, which allowed the Company to repurchase its
shares during periods when it otherwise might have been prevented from doing so under insider
trading laws. In total, the Company repurchased 808,900 shares under its repurchase plan at an
aggregate cost of $2,999,788. On August 26, 2008, the Company announced the completion of the
repurchase program.
Stock -Based Compensation
Non-qualified stock option awards (stock options) granted by the Company generally expire between
5 to 10 years from the grant date and generally vest over a 2 to 3 year service period commencing
on the grant date. Options granted to the Companys President and Chief Executive Officer and to
the Companys Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President during 2008 through 2010 are only
exercisable on such date or dates as the fair market value (as defined in their respective option
agreements) of the Companys Common Stock is and has been at least one hundred fifty percent (150%)
of the exercise price for the previous twenty (20) consecutive trading days. Nonvested shares
(restricted stock) generally vest over a three year service period commencing on the grant date.
Equity Compensation Plan
On October 13, 2009, the Companys Board of Directors approved, and recommended that the Companys
stockholders approve, the 2009 Omnibus Incentive Plan (Incentive Plan). On November 16, 2009, the
Companys stockholders approved the Incentive Plan by written consent.
An aggregate of 1,800,000 shares of Common Stock was reserved for issuance and available for awards
under the Incentive Plan. Awards under the Incentive Plan may include incentive stock options,
nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted shares of Common Stock,
restricted stock units, performance share or unit awards, other stock-based awards and cash-based
incentive awards. Awards under the Incentive Plan may be granted to employees, directors,
consultants or other persons providing services to the Company or its affiliates. The Incentive
Plan also provides for awards that are intended to qualify as performance-based compensation in
order to preserve the deductibility of such compensation by the Company under Section 162(m) of the
Internal Revenue Code. As of December 31, 2010, 135,000 shares remain reserved for issuance and
were available for awards under the Incentive Plan.
As of December 31, 2010, there was $1,783,122 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to
stock options and restricted stock. The cost is expected to be recognized in the Companys
financial statements over a weighted average period of 1.6 years.
76
Stock Options
The Company used the modified Black-Scholes model to estimate the fair value of employee stock
options on the date of grant utilizing the assumptions noted below. The risk-free rate is based on
the U.S. Treasury bill yield curve in effect at the time of grant for the expected term of the
option. The expected term of options granted represents the period of time that the options are
expected to be outstanding. Expected volatilities are based on historical volatilities of our
Common Stock. The dividend yield was based on expected dividends at the time of grant.
The following table provides the assumptions utilized in the Black-Scholes model for stock options
granted during years ended December 31, 2010 and 2008. There were no stock options granted in 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Weighted-average risk-free interest rate |
|
|
0.91 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
1.80 |
% |
Expected term of option in years |
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
2.27 |
|
Weighted-average volatility |
|
|
59.6 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
83.5 |
% |
Dividend yield |
|
|
9.8 |
% |
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
8.6 |
% |
Fair Value |
|
$ |
1.4593 |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
$ |
1.4289 |
|
The following table provides certain information related to stock option awards for the year ended
during December 31, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Intrinsic Value |
|
|
Term |
|
Outstanding December 31, 2009 |
|
|
6,345,000 |
|
|
$ |
3.21 |
|
|
$ |
17,888,900 |
|
|
|
2.14 |
|
Granted |
|
|
1,665,000 |
|
|
$ |
5.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(2,625,000 |
) |
|
$ |
1.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding December 31, 2010 |
|
|
5,385,000 |
|
|
$ |
4.68 |
|
|
$ |
3,927,150 |
|
|
|
2.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
4,527,500 |
|
|
$ |
4.60 |
|
|
$ |
3,927,150 |
|
|
|
2.47 |
|
The Company recognized total compensation expense related to stock options of $2,108,705,
$1,520,647 and $4,271,230 during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Deferred tax benefits related
to these amounts during 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $813,433, $586,590 and $1,647,626, respectively.
Total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested stock options was $562,951 at December
31, 2010, which will be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 0.71 years.
The Company received $14,000 in cash during 2010 representing the strike price of options on
exercise date. Tax benefits realized during 2010 from the exercise of stock options was $4,326,071.
A total of 1,314,160 shares of Common Stock were retained by the Company in 2010 for the cashless
exercise of stock options and settlement of taxes valued at $7,878,150.
On February 2, 2010, the Company granted stock options for an aggregate 350,000 shares of Common
Stock to the Companys Chief Operating Officer (COO) and Senior Vice President in consideration
for services rendered pursuant to terms of an employment agreement and to provide the COO and
Senior Vice President with a continued incentive to share in the success of the Company. The options have an exercise price of $5.84, expire on
February 2, 2015 and vest over two years as follows: options for 150,000shares on the grant date;
options for 100,000 shares on the one year anniversary of the grant date and options for 100,000
shares on the two year anniversary of the grant date.
On May 19, 2010, the Company granted options to purchase an aggregate of 1,315,000 shares of Common
Stock to the Companys directors (225,000 shares), executive officers (775,000 shares) and
management (315,000 shares) of which 50% of the options vested immediately and 50% are expected to
vest on May 19, 2011. The options have an exercise price of $4.87 per share and expire on May 19,
2015. The options granted to the Companys President and Chief
77
Executive Officer and to the Companys Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President, are only exercisable on such date or
dates as the fair market value, as defined in 2009 Omnibus Incentive Plan, of the Companys Common
Stock is and has been at least one-hundred fifty percent (150%) of the exercise price for the
previous twenty (20) consecutive trading days.
Restricted Stock Grants
Restricted stock grants are awarded to certain employees in consideration for services rendered
pursuant to terms of employment agreements and or to provide to those employees with a continued
incentive to share in the success of the Company. Unless otherwise specified, such as in the case
of the exercise of stock options or warrants, the per share prices were determined using the
closing price of the Companys Common Stock as quoted on the NYSE Amex LLC , and the shares were
issued in private transactions pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.
The following table provides certain information related to restricted stock awards during 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Grant Date |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Nonvested shares outstanding as of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
$ |
2.31 |
|
Granted |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
5.84 |
|
Vested |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
$ |
2.31 |
|
Forfeited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
n/a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonvested shares outstanding as of December 31, 2010 |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective February 2, 2010, the Company issued 300,000 shares of restricted Common Stock at a price
of $5.84 per share to its Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and Director. The stock
vests cumulatively over a three-year period as follows: 33 percent, 66 percent and 100 percent,
respectively, on the first, second and third anniversaries of the issue date. The Company recorded
deferred compensation of $1,752,000 at the time the stock was issued and is amortizing that amount
ratably over the vesting period.
Effective December 5, 2008, the Company issued 300,000 shares of restricted Common Stock at a price
of $2.43 per share its Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and Director. The stock
vested over a two-year period as follows: 150,000 shares vested on December 5, 2009, the first
anniversary of the effective date of the award, and 150,000 shares vested on December 5, 2010, the
second anniversary date of the effective date of the award. The Company recorded deferred
compensation of $729,000 at the time the stock was issued and amortized that amount ratably over
the vesting period.
The Company did not grant any shares of restricted stock during the year ended December 31, 2009.
The Company recognized total compensation expense related to the restricted stock of $852,692,
$654,833 and $333,965, during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Deferred tax benefits related to
these amounts during 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $328,928, $252,602 and $128,827, respectively. Total unrecognized compensation
expense related to restricted stock was $1,220,171 at December 31, 2010, which will be recognized
over a weighted-average period of approximately 2.08 years.
Warrants
No warrants were granted during 2010 and 2009 and there were no warrants outstanding as of December
31, 2010 and 2009.
Warrants to purchase 600,000 shares of Common Stock were exercised during 2008 at weighted average
prices of $1.00.
78
Stock Grantor Trust
On April 3, 2000, the Company established the Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. Stock Grantor
Trust (SGT) to fund its obligations arising from its various stock option agreements. The
Company funded the SGT with 2,900,000 shares of Company Common Stock. In exchange, the SGT
delivered $29,000 and a promissory note to the Company for approximately $2,320,000 which together
represents the purchase price of the shares. Amounts owed by the SGT to the Company will be repaid
by cash received by the SGT, which will result in the SGT releasing shares to satisfy Company
obligations for stock options. The assets of the SGT are subject to the claims of the Companys
general creditors under federal and state law. The consolidated financial statements include the
accounts of the SGT. Dividends paid by the Company and received by the SGT on shares of Common
Stock held in trust are eliminated in consolidation and shown net in the Consolidated Financial
Statements. Shares of the Common Stock held in SGT totaled 0 and 631,000 shares as of December 31,
2010 and 2009.
The agreement governing the operation of the SGT provides that the SGT shall terminate upon the
later of the date that (i) all shares of Common Stock available for issuance under the SGT have
been distributed or (ii) the promissory note is paid in full. The promissory note was paid in full
on March 15, 2010, and promptly thereafter all shares of Common Stock remaining in the SGT were
distributed to holders of Company options in satisfaction of the Companys obligations under
certain of its stock option agreements. The SGT was terminated upon this final distribution of
shares of Common Stock from the SGT, and as of March 31, 2010, the SGT did not hold any shares of
Common Stock.
NOTE 11 REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS
UPCIC and APPCIC are subject to comprehensive regulation by the OIR. The Florida Insurance Code
requires that UPCIC and APPCIC maintain minimum statutory surplus of the greatest of 10% of the
insurers total liabilities or $4,000,000. UPCIC and APPCIC are also required to adhere to
prescribed premium-to-surplus ratios under the Florida Insurance Code and to maintain approved
securities on deposit with the state of Florida. UPCICs and APPCICs statutory surplus as of
December 31, 2010 is $106,000,341 and $11,251,729, respectively.
The maximum amount of dividends which can be paid by Florida insurance companies without prior
approval of the Florida Commissioner is subject to restrictions relating to statutory surplus. The
maximum dividend that may be paid by UPCIC and APPCIC to the Company without prior approval is
limited to the lesser of statutory net income from operations of the preceding calendar year or
10.0% of statutory unassigned capital surplus as of the preceding year end. During the years ended
December 31, 2010 and 2009, UPCIC did not pay dividends to the Company. During the year ended
December 31, 2008, UPCIC declared and paid aggregate dividends to the Company of $23,000,000.
APPCIC has not declared or paid any dividends to the Company.
UPCIC and APPCIC are required annually to comply with the NAIC RBC requirements. RBC requirements
prescribe a method of measuring the amount of capital appropriate for an insurance company to
support its overall business operations in light of its size and risk profile. NAICs RBC
requirements are used by regulators to determine appropriate regulatory actions relating to
insurers who show signs of weak or deteriorating condition. As of December 31, 2010, based on
calculations using the appropriate NAIC RBC formula, UPCICs and APPCICs reported total adjusted
capital was in excess of the requirements.
NOTE 12 RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Downes and Associates, a multi-line insurance adjustment corporation based in Deerfield Beach,
Florida performs certain claims adjusting work for UPCIC. Downes and Associates is owned by Dennis
Downes, who is the father of Sean P. Downes, Chief Operating Officer and Senior Vice President of
UPCIC. During 2010 and 2009, the Company expensed claims adjusting fees of $480,000 and $605,000,
respectively, to Downes and Associates.
During the fourth quarter of 2009, the Company overpaid non-equity incentive plan compensation to
the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer in the amounts of $217,169 and $162,876,
respectively. These amounts were repaid to the Company during February 2010.
NOTE 13 EMPLOYEE BENEFIT PLAN
Effective January 1, 2009, the Company adopted a qualified retirement plan covering substantially
all employees. It is designed to help the employees meet their financial needs during their
retirement years. Eligibility for participation in
79
the plan is generally based on employees date of hire or on completion of a specified period of service. Employer contributions to this plan are
made in cash.
The plan titled the Universal Property & Casualty 401(K) Profit Sharing Plan and Trust (401(k)
Plan) is a defined contribution plan that allows employees to defer compensation through
contributions to the 401(k) Plan. The contributions are invested on the employees behalf, and the
benefits paid to employees are based on contributions and any earnings or loss. The 401(k) Plan
includes a Company contribution of 100 percent of each eligible participants contribution that
does not exceed five percent of their compensation during the 401(k) Plan year. The Company may
make additional profit-sharing contributions. However, no additional profit-sharing contribution
was made during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.
The Company made aggregate contributions of approximately $623,982 and $545,442 to the 401(k) Plan
during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
NOTE 14 EARNINGS PER SHARE
Basic earnings per share (EPS) is based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding for
the period, excluding any dilutive common share equivalents. Diluted EPS reflects the potential
dilution that could occur if securities to issue Common Stock were exercised.
The following table reconciles the numerator (i.e., income) and denominator (i.e., shares) of the
basic and diluted earnings per share computations for net income for the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available to |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per- |
|
|
Common |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per- |
|
|
Common |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Per- |
|
|
|
Stockholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share |
|
|
Stockholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share |
|
|
Stockholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Amount |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
36,983,762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
28,787,298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
40,037,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: preferred stocks dividends |
|
|
(19,950 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27,450 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(49,950 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income available to common
stockholders |
|
$ |
36,963,812 |
|
|
|
39,113,302 |
|
|
$ |
0.95 |
|
|
$ |
28,759,848 |
|
|
|
37,617,885 |
|
|
$ |
0.76 |
|
|
$ |
39,987,373 |
|
|
|
37,418,253 |
|
|
$ |
1.07 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options and warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
976,542 |
|
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,679,134 |
|
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,287,929 |
|
|
|
(0.06 |
) |
Preferred stock |
|
|
19,950 |
|
|
|
159,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,450 |
|
|
|
174,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,950 |
|
|
|
568,325 |
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income available to common
stockholders and assumed
conversion |
|
$ |
36,983,762 |
|
|
|
40,249,677 |
|
|
$ |
0.92 |
|
|
$ |
28,787,298 |
|
|
|
40,471,524 |
|
|
$ |
0.71 |
|
|
$ |
40,037,323 |
|
|
|
40,274,507 |
|
|
$ |
0.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 15 OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
The components of other comprehensive income (loss) on a pretax and after-tax basis for the years
ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:
80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pretax |
|
|
Tax |
|
|
After-tax |
|
|
Pretax |
|
|
Tax |
|
|
After-tax |
|
|
Pretax |
|
|
Tax |
|
|
After-tax |
|
Unrealized (losses) gains on
available-for-sale securities |
|
$ |
(1,570,523 |
) |
|
$ |
603,732 |
|
|
$ |
(966,791 |
) |
|
$ |
31,860,665 |
|
|
$ |
(12,290,251 |
) |
|
$ |
19,570,414 |
|
|
$ |
40,429 |
|
|
$ |
(15,595 |
) |
|
$ |
24,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassification of
unrealized gains on
available-for-sale-securities
to earnings |
|
|
656,307 |
|
|
|
(253,170 |
) |
|
|
403,137 |
|
|
|
30,983,465 |
|
|
|
(11,951,871 |
) |
|
|
19,031,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
comprehensive income (loss) |
|
$ |
(914,216 |
) |
|
$ |
350,562 |
|
|
$ |
(563,654 |
) |
|
$ |
877,200 |
|
|
$ |
(338,380 |
) |
|
$ |
538,820 |
|
|
$ |
40,429 |
|
|
$ |
(15,595 |
) |
|
$ |
24,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of taxes, as of December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, is
comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Net unrealized gains: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities, available for sale |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(907,720 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,871,969 |
|
|
|
40,429 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(46,619 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains |
|
|
|
|
|
|
917,630 |
|
|
|
40,429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(353,976 |
) |
|
|
(15,595 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of taxes |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
563,654 |
|
|
$ |
24,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 16 COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
Employment Agreements and Potential Payments Upon Certain Events
The Company has entered into employment agreements with certain employees which are in effect
as of December 31, 2010. The agreements provide for minimum salaries, which may be subject to
annual percentage increases, and non-equity incentive compensation for certain executives based on pre-tax or net
income levels attained by the Company. The agreements also provide for payments to certain
executives upon the occurrence of certain events. The following table provides the amount of
commitments and contingencies at December 31, 2010, through the expiration of employment contracts
with named executive officers and certain other officers with whom the Company has entered into
employment contracts. The contingent events are assumed to have occurred at December 31, 2010, and
the amount of non-equity incentive compensation are based on actual amounts during 2010.
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Salaries |
|
|
Non-equity
incentive compensation |
|
Commitments |
|
$ |
19,134,851 |
|
|
$ |
15,747,225 |
|
Contingent payments upon certain events: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination |
|
$ |
6,679,746 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Change in control |
|
$ |
14,704,676 |
|
|
$ |
9,353,762 |
|
Death |
|
$ |
7,461,515 |
|
|
$ |
9,979,031 |
|
Disability |
|
$ |
1,751,787 |
|
|
$ |
2,868,656 |
|
Operating Leases
The Company has leased certain computer equipment and software under a master equipment lease
agreement with Relational Funding, Inc. with an original equipment cost of $2,735,960. The Company
also has several leases on office space. The following is a schedule of future minimum rental
payments required under the non-cancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
$ |
255,592 |
|
2012 |
|
|
222,554 |
|
2013 |
|
|
117,049 |
|
2014 and later |
|
|
119,816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
715,011 |
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation
Certain lawsuits have been filed against the Company. In the opinion of management, none of these
lawsuits are material and they are all adequately reserved for or covered by insurance or, if not
so covered, are without merit or involve such amounts that if disposed of unfavorably would not
have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial position or results of operations.
NOTE 17 FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
GAAP defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants as of the measurement date. GAAP
describes three approaches to measuring the fair value of assets and liabilities: the market
approach, the income approach and the cost approach. Each approach includes multiple valuation
techniques. GAAP does not prescribe which valuation technique should be used when measuring fair
value, but does establish a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used in applying the
various techniques. Inputs broadly refer to the assumptions that market participants use to make
pricing decisions, including assumptions about risk. Level 1 inputs are given the highest priority
in the hierarchy while Level 3 inputs are given the lowest priority. Assets and liabilities carried
at fair value are classified in one of the following three categories based on the nature of the
inputs to the valuation technique used:
|
|
|
Level 1 Observable inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets
or liabilities in active markets as of the reporting date. Active markets are those in
which transactions for the asset or liability occur in sufficient frequency and volume to
provide pricing information on an ongoing basis. |
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Observable market-based inputs or unobservable inputs that are corroborated by
market data. |
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data. These inputs
reflect managements best estimate of fair value using its own assumptions about the
assumptions a market participant would use in pricing the asset or liability. |
82
Summary of significant valuation techniques for assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis
Level 1
U.S government obligations and agencies: Comprise U.S. Treasury Notes. Valuation is based on
unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in active markets that the Company can access.
Common stock: Comprise actively traded, exchange-listed U.S. and international equity securities.
Valuation is based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in active markets that the
Company can access.
Exchange traded and mutual funds: Comprise actively traded funds. Valuation is based on daily
quoted net asset values for identical assets in active markets that the Company can access.
Level 2
U.S government obligations and agencies: Comprise U.S. Treasury Inflation Index Bonds. The
primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical
assets in inactive markets
or similar assets in
active or inactive
markets, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads.
Exchange-traded derivatives: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices or quoted
net asset values for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active.
The following tables set forth by level within the fair value hierarchy the companys assets and
liabilities that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2010 and
2009. As required by GAAP, assets and liabilities are classified in their entirety based on the
lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The companys assessment
of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment, and may
affect their placement within the fair value hierarchy levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities (trading): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US government obligations and agencies |
|
$ |
179,263 |
|
|
$ |
129,936,744 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
130,116,007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities (trading): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Precious metals and mining |
|
|
25,751,909 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,751,909 |
|
Other |
|
|
362,520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
362,520 |
|
Exchange traded and mutual funds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Precious metals and mining |
|
|
42,209,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,209,279 |
|
Agriculture |
|
|
14,876,584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,876,584 |
|
Energy |
|
|
5,559,296 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,559,296 |
|
Indices |
|
|
4,613,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,613,105 |
|
Other |
|
|
1,043,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,043,704 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
94,416,397 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94,416,397 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange-traded derivatives (other
assets) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
181,988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
181,988 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
94,595,660 |
|
|
$ |
130,118,732 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
224,714,392 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
Total |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities (available for sale): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US government obligations and
agencies |
|
$ |
41,389,008 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
41,389,008 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities (available for sale): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Precious Metals and Mining |
|
|
7,597,419 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,597,419 |
|
Energy |
|
|
256,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
256,053 |
|
Other |
|
|
221,760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
221,760 |
|
Exchange traded and mutual funds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Precious metals and mining |
|
|
38,753,742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,753,742 |
|
Agriculture |
|
|
11,754,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,754,630 |
|
Energy |
|
|
3,306,815 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,306,815 |
|
Indices |
|
|
7,963,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,963,094 |
|
Other |
|
|
3,554,489 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,554,489 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
|
73,408,002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,408,002 |
|
Total |
|
$ |
114,797,010 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
114,797,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The company did not have any transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 for the year ended December 31,
2010.
The following table summarizes the carrying value, net unrealized gains (losses) and estimated fair
values of the Companys financial instruments that are not carried at fair value.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized |
|
|
Estimated Fair |
|
|
|
Carrying value |
|
|
Gains/(Losses) |
|
|
Value |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
147,585,464 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonds payable |
|
$ |
23,161,764 |
|
|
$ |
(4,062,514 |
) |
|
$ |
19,099,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
23,161,764 |
|
|
$ |
(4,062,514 |
) |
|
$ |
19,099,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized |
|
|
Estimated Fair |
|
|
|
Carrying value |
|
|
Gains/(Losses) |
|
|
Value |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
192,924,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bonds payable |
|
$ |
24,632,353 |
|
|
$ |
(6,332,464 |
) |
|
$ |
18,299,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
24,632,353 |
|
|
$ |
(6,332,464 |
) |
|
$ |
18,299,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents approximate fair value due to their liquid nature.
The carrying value of long term debt was determined from the expected cash flows discounted using
the interest rate quoted by the issuer of the note, the SBA which is below prevailing rates quoted
by private lending institutions. However, as the Companys use of funds from the surplus note is
limited by the terms of the agreement, the Company has determined the interest rate quoted by the
SBA to be appropriate for purposes of establishing the fair value of the note.
84
NOTE 18 QUARTERLY RESULTS FOR 2010 AND 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First |
|
|
Second |
|
|
Third |
|
|
Fourth |
|
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
|
Quarter |
|
For the year
ended December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
$ |
45,219,924 |
|
|
$ |
55,860,022 |
|
|
$ |
70,735,701 |
|
|
$ |
68,107,585 |
|
Total expenses |
|
|
33,840,361 |
|
|
|
38,224,224 |
|
|
|
49,423,153 |
|
|
|
56,157,691 |
|
Net Income |
|
|
6,944,248 |
|
|
|
10,766,330 |
|
|
|
13,077,210 |
|
|
|
6,195,575 |
|
Basic earnings per share |
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.16 |
|
Diluted earnings per share |
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
0.32 |
|
|
|
0.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the year
ended December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
$ |
48,117,800 |
|
|
$ |
47,549,345 |
|
|
$ |
60,983,047 |
|
|
$ |
53,991,937 |
|
Total expenses |
|
|
27,935,892 |
|
|
|
35,105,355 |
|
|
|
42,443,473 |
|
|
|
58,994,585 |
|
Net Income |
|
|
12,437,830 |
|
|
|
7,638,558 |
|
|
|
11,514,520 |
|
|
|
(2,803,610 |
) |
Basic earnings per share |
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.20 |
|
|
|
0.31 |
|
|
|
(0.08 |
) |
Diluted earnings per share |
|
|
0.31 |
|
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
(0.07 |
) |
The fourth quarter results of 2010 compared to 2009 are attributable to an increase
in net premiums earned, and to a lesser degree, lower operating costs and expenses. Realized
gains on investments, which were partially offset by unrealized losses on investments, also positively contributed to overall financial results. The improved profitability was moderated by state-mandated wind mitigation credits within the state of Florida, and lower foreign currency transaction gains.
NOTE 19 SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
The Company performed an evaluation of subsequent events through the date the financial statements
were issued and determined there were no recognized or unrecognized subsequent events that would
require an adjustment or additional disclosure in the consolidated financial statements as of
December 31, 2010 except for the following.
On January 6, 2011, the Company declared a dividend of $0.10 per share on its outstanding Common
Stock of the Company to be paid on April 7, 2011 to the shareholders of record of the Company at
the close of business on March 11, 2011.
|
|
|
ITEM 9. |
|
CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE |
NONE
|
|
|
ITEM 9A. |
|
CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The Company maintains disclosure
controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in the reports that the Company files or submits under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms, and
that such information is accumulated and communicated to the Companys management, including its
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
As of the end of the period
covered by this report, the Company carried out an evaluation,
under the supervision and with the participation of its principal executive officer and principal
financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures pursuant to Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act. Based on that evaluation,
the Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2010.
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
The management of the Company is
responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate
internal control over financial reporting. The Companys internal control system was designed to
provide reasonable assurance to the Companys management and Board of Directors regarding the
preparation and fair presentation of published financial statements.
All internal control systems, no
matter how well designed, have inherent limitations.
Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with
respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.
Management assessed the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2010. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set
forth in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on this assessment, management believes
that, as of December 31, 2010, the Companys internal control over financial reporting is effective
based on those criteria.
Managements assessment of
the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2010 has been audited by Blackman Kallick LLP, the independent registered public
accounting firm who also audited the Companys consolidated financial statements. The auditors
attestation report on managements assessment of the Companys internal control over financial
reporting is presented above at Report of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting
Firm.
85
Enhancing Controls
Subsequent to the filing of the
Companys Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010,
management discovered that its external provider of investment accounting services incorrectly
coded a series of purchases of an investment security held by the Company. The control at the
external provider which failed to detect this misstatement was a manual asset reconciliation.
Managements review of this asset reconciliation as of September 30, 2010 failed to detect
miscoding of the transactions relating to a single security. As a result of this human error,
which was detected through the Companys fourth quarter internal control procedures over financial
reporting, management, in consultation with the Audit Committee, determined that the Companys
failure to properly execute its existing control procedure, i.e., timely detect the coding error
for the investment security in its investment portfolio, was a material weakness.
During managements fourth
quarter 2010 procedures, management tested 100% of the investment
transactions in the affected account and no additional errors were identified. Management
determined the error described above to be an isolated incident.
Management decided, however, to
further enhance these existing controls. The external service
provider has developed and implemented a report which identifies significant fluctuations in
month-end market prices compared to both purchase prices and sales prices followed by the
providers review and sign-off of the report. Additionally, the external provider has an Account
Manager, not involved in any of the monthly transaction processing or reconciling, complete an
independent, secondary reconciliation of the report. Lastly, management has instituted
supplemental analytical review procedures to its existing internal controls over financial
reporting to further reduce the probability of re-occurrence of a failure to detect future errors
in external provider reporting. As a result of managements actions, no remediation is deemed
necessary, as this was deemed an isolated error in executing an existing internal control.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in the Companys internal control over
financial reporting during the fourth quarter of 2010 that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
|
|
|
ITEM 9B. |
|
OTHER INFORMATION |
NONE
PART III
|
|
|
ITEM 10. |
|
DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE |
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics
The Company adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics on December 5, 2008 that is
applicable to all directors, officers and employees of the Company. The code is publicly available
at the Companys headquarters in Fort Lauderdale, Florida and also on the Companys website at
www.universalinsuranceholdings.com. A copy of the Companys Code of Business Conduct and Ethics
may be obtained free of charge by written request to George R. De Heer, CFO, Universal Insurance
Holdings, Inc., 1110 West Commercial Boulevard, Suite 100, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309.
For information regarding our Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance,
reference is made to our definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which
will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2010
and which is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
|
ITEM 11. |
|
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION |
For information regarding Executive Compensation, reference is made to our definitive proxy
statement for our Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which will be filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2010 and which is incorporated herein by
reference.
86
|
|
|
ITEM 12. |
|
SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS |
For information regarding Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters, reference is made to our definitive proxy statement for our Annual
Meeting of Shareholders, which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120
days after December 31, 2010 and which is incorporated herein by
reference.
|
|
|
ITEM 13. |
|
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND
DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE |
For information regarding Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence, reference is made to our definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting of
Shareholders, which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after
December 31, 2010 and which is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
|
ITEM 14. |
|
PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES |
For information regarding Principal Accountant Fees and Services, reference is made to our
definitive proxy statement for our Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which will be filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after December 31, 2010 and which is
incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
|
|
|
ITEM 15. |
|
EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES |
(1) Financial Statements
The following consolidated financial statements of the Company and the report of the Independent
Registered Certified Public Accounting Firm thereon filed with this report:
Report of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting Firm (Blackman Kallick LLP).
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2010 and 2009.
Consolidated
Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders Equity for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) Financial Statement Schedules
The following additional financial statement schedules are furnished herewith pursuant to the
requirements of Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page |
|
Schedules required to be filed under the provisions of Regulation S-X Article 7: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S-1 |
|
|
|
|
S-4 |
|
|
|
|
S-4 |
|
|
|
|
S-5 |
|
87
All other schedules are omitted because they are not applicable, or not required, or because
the required information is included in the Consolidated Financial Statements or in notes thereto.
|
|
|
(3) EXHIBITS |
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
Registrants Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended (1) |
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Registrants Bylaws (1) |
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
Certificate of Designation for Series A Convertible Preferred Stock dated October 11, 1994 (4) |
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Certificate of Designations, Preferences, and Rights of Series M Convertible Preferred Stock dated
August 13, 1997 (2) |
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation dated October 19, 1998 (4) |
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation dated December 18, 2000
(4) |
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
Certificate of Amendment of Certificate of Designations of the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
dated October 29, 2001 (4) |
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Form of Common Stock Certificate (1) |
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Form of Warrant Certificate (1) |
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Form of Warrant Agency Agreement (1) |
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Form of Underwriter Warrant (1) |
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
Affiliate Warrant (1) |
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Form of Warrant to purchase 100,000 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $2.00 per share
issued to Steven Guarino dated as of April 24, 1997. (Substantially similar in form to two additional
warrants to purchase 100,000 shares of Common Stock issued to Mr. Guarino dated as of April 24, 1997,
with exercise prices of $2.75 and $3.50 per share, respectively) (2) |
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Registrant and each of its directors and executive
officers (1) |
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
Management Agreements by and between Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company and Universal P&C
Management, Inc. dated as of June 2, 1997 (2) |
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
Employment Agreement dated as of May 1, 1997 between Universal Heights, Inc. and Bradley I. Meier (2)* |
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated October 11, 2006, between James M. Lynch and Universal Insurance
Holdings, Inc. (8)* |
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
Employment Agreement, dated as of January 1, 2005, between Sean Downes and Universal Insurance
Holdings, Inc. (9)* |
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
Amendment to Employment Agreement of Bradley I. Meier, dated March 21, 2007 (10)* |
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
Amendment to Employment Agreement of Sean P. Downes, dated March 21, 2007 (10)* |
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
Addendum No. 8 to the Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Bradley I. Meier, dated July
12, 2007 (11)* |
88
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
Addendum No. 2 to the Employment Agreement by and between the Company and Sean P. Downes, dated
July 12, 2007 (11)* |
|
|
|
10.10
|
|
Addendum No. 1 to the Employment Agreement by and between the Company and James M. Lynch, dated
July 12, 2007 (11)* |
|
|
|
10.11
|
|
Addendum No. 9 to Meier Employment Agreement, dated December 5, 2008 (12)* |
|
|
|
10.12
|
|
Addendum No. 3 to Downes Employment Agreement, dated December 5, 2008 (12)* |
|
|
|
10.13
|
|
Addendum No. 4 to Downes Employment Agreement, dated February 4, 2010 (15) |
|
|
|
10.14
|
|
Employment Agreement, by and between the Company and George De Heer, dated as of September 30, 2010 (16) |
|
|
|
10.15
|
|
Addendum No.10 to Meier Employment Agreement, dated December 6, 2010 (17) |
|
|
|
10.16
|
|
Florida Insurance Capital Build-Up Incentive Program Surplus Note (Surplus Note) between the
Company and The State Board of Administration of Florida (SBA). (13) |
|
|
|
10.17
|
|
Addendum No. 1 to the Surplus Note between the Company and SBA. (13) |
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Multiple Line Quota Share Reinsurance Contract between the Company and Everest Reinsurance
Company. (13) |
|
|
|
10.19
|
|
Independent Adjusting Firm Agreement between the Company and Downes and Associates. (13) |
|
|
|
10.20
|
|
The Universal Insurance Holdings, Inc. 2009 Omnibus Incentive Plan (14) |
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Income (9) |
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (7) |
|
|
|
16.1
|
|
Letter on change in certifying accountants from Millward & Co. CPAs dated February 12, 1999, and
as amended February 26, 1999 (3) |
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
Letter on change in certifying accountants from Deloitte & Touche LLP dated October 7, 2002(5) |
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
Letter on change in certifying accountants from Deloitte & Touche LLP dated March 27, 2003(6) |
|
|
|
21
|
|
List of Subsidiaries |
|
|
|
23.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
32
|
|
Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Title 18,
United States Code, Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 |
|
|
|
99.1
|
|
Schedule of Investments |
|
|
|
* |
|
Exhibit Numbers 10.6-10.15 are management contracts or compensatory plans required to be filed as
Exhibits to this Form 10-K. |
|
|
|
(1)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Registration Statement on
Form S-1 (File No. 33-51546) declared effective on December 14, 1992 |
|
|
|
(2)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
for the year ended April 30, 1997 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on August 13, 1997, as amended |
|
|
|
(3)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K
and Current Report on Form 8-K/A, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 12, 1999 and February 26, 1999, respectively |
|
|
|
(4)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-KSB
for the year ended December 31, 2002 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 9, 2003 |
89
|
|
|
(5)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 7, 2002 |
|
|
|
(6)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 2, 2003 |
|
|
|
(7)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-KSB,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 30, 2007 |
|
|
|
(8)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Annual Report on Form
10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2006 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 24, 2007 |
|
|
|
(9)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-KSB,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 17, 2007 |
|
|
|
(10)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 22, 2007 |
|
|
|
(11)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 10, 2007 |
|
|
|
(12)
|
|
Incorporated by reference to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 9, 2008 |
|
|
|
|