No sense
Another year-end project, another set of nonsensical requests from client.
(1) About a month before the start of this project, the client proposed a timeline, setting out delivery deadlines for both parties. A couple of months later, when it was obvious that they couldn't meet their deadline of providing us data, they extended their deadline by a month but cut our (the actuarial consultants) delivery time for the report by a month. As an illustration:
Old deadlines New deadlines
Client to provide data: 15 Jan Client to provide data: 15 Feb
Us to provide report: 1 Apr Us to provide report: 1 Mar
This is clearly unfair and makes no sense.
(2) Client had 2 types of business: let's call them C and S. As commissioned by them, the actuarial report covered only business C. A standard valuation report will cover valuation method, data, assumptions and all other factors relevant to the exercise. This then underpins the valuation figures presented in the report. However, this time, client requested valuation results of business S (we were always engaged to do this but not included in the report) to be presented in the appendix. So imagine reading the report that was structured in a coherent manner and suddenly popped up valuation results of business S out of nowhere without warning and, more importantly, without a proper write up of how these results came about.
The client should be open with us about their intentions so that we could try our best to help them. If, however, this was something that they couldn't even confide in us, then it was probably too fishy to be considered in the first place.
(1) About a month before the start of this project, the client proposed a timeline, setting out delivery deadlines for both parties. A couple of months later, when it was obvious that they couldn't meet their deadline of providing us data, they extended their deadline by a month but cut our (the actuarial consultants) delivery time for the report by a month. As an illustration:
Old deadlines New deadlines
Client to provide data: 15 Jan Client to provide data: 15 Feb
Us to provide report: 1 Apr Us to provide report: 1 Mar
This is clearly unfair and makes no sense.
(2) Client had 2 types of business: let's call them C and S. As commissioned by them, the actuarial report covered only business C. A standard valuation report will cover valuation method, data, assumptions and all other factors relevant to the exercise. This then underpins the valuation figures presented in the report. However, this time, client requested valuation results of business S (we were always engaged to do this but not included in the report) to be presented in the appendix. So imagine reading the report that was structured in a coherent manner and suddenly popped up valuation results of business S out of nowhere without warning and, more importantly, without a proper write up of how these results came about.
The client should be open with us about their intentions so that we could try our best to help them. If, however, this was something that they couldn't even confide in us, then it was probably too fishy to be considered in the first place.
Comments
Oh, I may not have been clear in my post. What I meant is that they extended the deadline of delivering the data (supplied by client) but they cut our (actuarial consultants) delivery time for the report. I'll edit the post.