graham
About
- Username
- graham
- Joined
- Visits
- 3,987
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
Corrected, thx!
-
Unfortunately not. We've done 2 of the 3 major rewrites (see below) and we've turned our attention now to the remaining lower ranked articles that appear to have less substantial changes. Here are the 2 very important new articles that are complete …
-
Yup, thx! I have corrected it.
-
I tried to make the answers match as closely as possible to what was stated (or implied) in the source text, but it's not an exact science. I think as long as your answer is logical and clearly written, it would be marked correct. Do you have any fu…
-
Ok, it's fixed (mostly). Quiz 8 isn't bringing up any BattleCards but we'll look into it.
-
We will correct that today. In the meantime, you can still get to the quizzes using the quiz scores page: * https://battleactsmain.ca/BattlePlan_CombatTraining.php
-
Yup, thanks. I've fixed it. (Sometimes you have to clear your browser cache to see the update.)
-
Based on the column headings, it looks like 20.12 is for contracts not measured under PAA (which I assume means GMA) and 20.14 carries forward the information from 20.12 and combines it with contracts measured under PAA. There is no other informa…
-
For this reading, I'm using my judgment plus what has appeared on past exams on this topic. Here are a few comments that I hope help: * First, to address one of your questions: All the calculations you're likely to need to know are in the web-b…
-
Ok, I found a typo. Should be working now. Sorry for the trouble. Thanks.
-
I will check the javascript code for the web-based problem.
-
Sorry, typo. The 3rd line of information should have said, "...at Dec 31, 2022..." I've corrected it. Thanks.
-
Yes, that's true that other wiki articles refer to it. I didn't know the CIA.IFRS17 reading was going to be removed otherwise I wouldn't have linked to it so heavily. There is a new IFRS 17 reading that was added to the syllabus and we should be …
-
Actually, I think the whole reading is no longer relevant although the CAS made no mention of this in the change memo. I have written to the exam committee asking whether the reading should be removed entirely because it refers to both the old MfAD …
-
Yes, this is surprising. I've also noticed the syllabus is sometimes updated during the exam cycle and links to online text references are sometimes changed without notification. I emailed the CAS about this and they responded that it's the candi…
-
That is my interpretation (although I don't think it is specifically stated in the source text.)
-
I think you might be trying to draw too fine a distinction here with "administration" versus other aspects of insurance. If an exam question asked for advantages of private administration of insurance, the above answers should be awarded full credit.
-
I think in (2), the term "returns" also includes quarterly returns.
-
I believe there was a comment in an examiner's report (can't remember which year or question) that stated something to that effect: If a candidate answers based on current information, they will receive credit even if it contradicts the official syl…
-
I think you should probably memorize the full name. That's the accepted way that legal cases are referenced.
-
Yes, they're the same thing.
-
In general, the money is awarded but then isn't always used in the optimal way. See CLEV at this link: * https://battleactsmain.ca/wiki6c/Marshall.Benefits#Problems_with_Ontario_Auto_Insurance So yes, part of the unfair delivery is a delay …
-
Yes, all the same!
-
Privately administered insurance definitely has a few advantages: * private insurance pricing is risk-based so it's fairer to consumers * private insurers compete for customers so may have better customer service and more innovation regarding …
-
Sounds logical, although none of that is discussed in the source text.
-
I've reworded the question. Thanks for the feedback.
-
I just assumed that cities buy insurance for just these sorts of situations but I don't know for sure. If that's the case then Sudbury's insurer would have had to pay. Or maybe the plaintiff's auto insurer didn't want to pay the medical expenses and…
-
fyi..I wrote to the CAS regarding issues with this exam problem but they dismissed my concerns. I don't think it's a good problem and my advice is to not spend too much more time on it.
-
Thx, I've changed the question about "pre-judgment interest" to "vicarious liability".
-
I should probably have written ">=180%" but I wouldn't worry about it. It's extremely unlikely the ratio in a given problem would work out to exactly 180% so the distinction between "greater than" and "greater than or equal to" wouldn't come into…