The relevant radioactive exclusion clauses clearly state that Assureds are not covered for loss or damage as a result of nuclear radiation produced by nuclear fuel, waste, matter, nuclear combustion or any nuclear weapons.

Clauses such as these serve a very important function. If radiation contamination were not excluded, the insurance industry could face collapse if a widespread nuclear incident or conflict occurred. These clauses therefore exists to prevent that, and rightly so.

However, their introduction originally arose from fears of a catastrophic nuclear conflict and we believe that the time has come to reconsider the market’s approach to relatively finite incidents such as the Fukushima radiation leak.

The industry has an opportunity here to meet the needs of shipowners, charterers and cargo interests by offering insurance cover that can respond to this type of incident. That cover would necessarily be strictly limited in quantum and perhaps also by some measure of the scale of the nuclear incident. Ideally the initiative should encompass physical damage buybacks for ships and cargo which may be leaving, entering or transiting an affected area. Extensions to P&I and Charterer’s covers addressing the concerns of owners and charterers affected by a nuclear incident and at risk of disputes might also be made available.

In a situation such as that following the Japanese earthquake and tsunami, where the chartering of ships to bring relief supplies and reconstruction equipment is problematic because of the risk of irradiation, an appropriate insurance solution should not only be commercially feasible, but represent an attractive product for the industry’s customers. It is also in the public interest.

The maritime news continues to be filled with articles about pirate attacks in the Gulf of Aden, while piracy also continues less reported in several other key areas such as Nigeria, the Philippines and Brazil. There has been some discussion, and perhaps confusion, about what support is available to shipowners in the event of a pirate attack.

To mitigate the risk, some shipowners are avoiding the area but at substantial additional expense, and others are using organised convoys or employing security staff for the vessel.

Marine Kidnap and Ransom insurance can play a key part in any shipowner’s risk management strategy because it covers the specific costs associated with piracy attacks, however there has been some misunderstanding regarding the detail of the cover.

Andrew Brooker, director at marine insurance brokers FP Marine Risks, says: “We are often asked what insurance protection is available to shipowners in light of the increased risk of piracy. Marine Kidnap and Ransom needs to be seen as a service that shipowners can draw upon that isn’t catered for by traditional hull insurance.”

Traditional hull insurance only protects the shipowner from loss or damage to the vessel as a result of piracy and is only designed to work in a reactive manner once the claim is made after the event.

In the absence of physical loss or damage, the ransom and associated costs would be considered a General Average expense and settled by all parties against their respective values. However, the legitimacy of these costs being claimed in GA has never been tested and could be disputed by the cargo parties’ insurers.

Given the amount of shipping traffic that transits areas such as the Gulf of Aden, statistically the risk of a pirate attack is quite low. However, when it does happen, shipowners are faced with a challenging range of issues they are unlikely to have encountered before.

Brooker explains: “Shipowners suddenly find themselves with a host of questions about how to move forward – how do they find the necessary help from specialist negotiators; how do they enter into effective communications with hijackers; how do they deal with threats to their crew, vessel and cargo; how do they raise and deliver the ransom?”

Marine Kidnap and Ransom insurance is designed to specifically meet the needs of shipowners in dealing with these issues. It also provides the security of having an insurance in place that ensures the shipowner receives priority treatment from kidnap negotiators and other personnel involved. It covers all the necessary related costs that are needed to secure the safe and quick release of the vessel, crew and cargo, including the ransom and its delivery.

Furthermore, if a shipowner were to declare General Average in an attempt to raise the ransom, it could jeopardise their commercial relationships.

Brooker says: “There is generally no deductible with Kidnap and Ransom insurance, so owners are not exposed to additional costs after the premium and our cover ensures the Kidnap and Ransom insurers do not seek to recover any aspect of the costs from cargo or charterer interests, thereby preserving those commercial relationships. It also has the effect of protecting the owner’s existing Hull & Machinery or War cover from a loss which exposes them to an increase in rating for the following year – in effect, Kidnap and Ransom insurance has no memory and will not seek to recover claims through increases in premium.”

The global economic gloom is casting its shadow over insurance like everything else, with sharp rises in premiums likely across the board in the near future. We asked logistics-industry insurance expert Philip Bilney* why reducing cover is not a good idea.

Can project forwarders avoid paying more for insurance?
The temptation is always there to skimp on insurance cover. Reducing the level of cover or seeking less comprehensive policies may save money short-term but the risk is that it would be a “false economy”. It does look as though the insurance market in general will harden over the next several months – in other words premiums will rise – for a number of reasons. This applies to most sectors including Marine Cargo insurance, E&O, projects and project-related cover such as Delayed Start-Up (DSU) or Advanced Loss of Profits (ALOP) insurance. But the answer at a time like this is to look to an organisation such as the WCA Family that has the buying power to reduce the impact of any market price hikes.

So insurers are seeking to restore their profits?
Essentially, yes, because insurance companies have to make a profit like anyone else. Here are some of the reasons why – reasons you may care to pass on to project owners tempted to cut back at this difficult time.

First, supply and demand: insurance capital is derived primarily from equity markets and when that capital dries up, the amount of risk any one insurer can accept is reduced. Less equity market capital means a reduced supply of insurance capital, which in turn leads to a higher price to buy that small part of it which you need to cover your risk. In this regard it behaves in much the same way as any other commodity, but in the opposite direction.

Similarly, there is not an abundance of capital sloshing around looking to take advantage of a perceived increase in rates. After Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, which hit the Energy and Offshore market so hard, there was a rush of new capital into the industry to take advantage of the anticipated hardening, with the result that it never actually happened. That sort of capital ingress often tends to manifest itself in the form of new start-up reinsurance companies which are effectively the wholesalers of insurance capital.

But surely premiums are already expensive?
Actually, premiums will be rising from a relatively low level. The market has been at historically soft levels for the last year or so and thus is due an upturn anyway (in my experience upturns only really happen when the market is already genuinely soft). We had the same situation immediately before 9/11, which prompted the last serious hardening of the market.

Also, major losses were unusually high in 2008. For example, claims from
Hurricane Ike alone are expected to reach USD16 billion.

Insurance companies are famously known as “investors with a bad habit” (underwriting), so many have been hit hard by a collapse in their asset values. The thing is, very few are admitting to it yet.

What other factors contribute?
Generally speaking, recessions on a scale now being encountered worldwide produce more crime, including fraudulent claims and associated losses, and that of course drives up premiums.

Insurance buyers will often ask why the cost of their particular insurance has gone up in a hard market although the risk remains the same. The answer is that all classes of insurance are connected because the source of capital is much the same, and reinsurance costs (the mechanism by which insurance companies offset their risks) tend to rise across the whole industry. So the tide of the whole market rises and falls as one, although of course individual anomalies do occur here and there.

When will the premium increases start to hit home?
Curiously enough given the depressing economic news, there is some debate over whether this hardening is actually happening as yet. The ‘rescue’ of AIG has actually had the effect of reducing some prices because AIG has to compete harder to retain market share, and in other areas some insurers are maintaining prices in order to avoid losing good business.

But in general, insurance companies are refusing to reduce premiums now and there are some areas (Marine Hull for example) where increases of 5-10 percent are already being applied. The jury is still out, but the general view in the industry is that prices will move sharply upward from early 2009.

Trade Credit premiums, on the other hand, have already doubled. If you can buy cover at all. Default & bankruptcy claims are escalating dramatically and most insurers in that sector (there are only a handful) are hunkering down and declining to accept much new business while they wait for the storm to pass. But business is still being done.

So what can project forwarders do to economise?
Despite some rising prices, now would be the worst possible time to run uninsured. Claim frequencies will rise, not only for the reasons I mentioned above, but also because more goods will be rejected by customers than would normally be the case, and if they are genuinely damaged, then cargo insurance will cover this.

FSL (freight services liability cover) also becomes more vital as people get more litigious and the nmber of disputes rises. Forwarding businesses are highly exposed at the best of times, but the risks can only worsen as the world’s economies slide into recession and trading becomes more difficult.

It’s also worth bearing in mind that insurance companies tend to give a much better deal to long-standing clients than they do to companies who are perceived to dip in and out of the market. So while there is every reason to ‘shop around’, there is also value in building and maintaining a good relationship with an insurer over time – try to work only with reputable, secure insurers and where possible leverage off the influence of those organisations who have genuine buying power.

*Philip Bilney is group executive director of FP Marine Risks, a specialist provider of insurance products and services across the entire spectrum of Marine and related sectors. Based in Hong Kong, in 2006 the company was the first Asian-based insurance broker to become a fully accredited Lloyd’s of London broker following three years of mandatory provisional accreditation. FP Marine Risks, the sole broker for WCA Family of Logistic Networks, developed Project Cargo Insurance, one of a suite of products available exclusively to members of WCA Family that includes Marine (cargo) insurance and Freight Services (E&O and legal liability) cover.

Minimising the Risks for Charterers
Avoiding the area entirely will limit a vessel’s exposure to the risk of piracy although, as in the high profile case of the Sirius Star, it is not always successful.  Sirius Star had chosen to sail via the Cape of Good Hope, but was still captured by Somali pirates over 450 nautical miles off the coast of Kenya.

Moreover, significant deviations are a costly and time consuming alternative for Charterers, who pay hire costs for the additional time taken to sail past the Cape.

In the event of a hijacking, the vessel could remain on hire for the duration of the detention with any off-hire likely to lead to a dispute.  The average period for vessels to be detained is six to seven weeks, so the Charterers’ exposure to hire charges whilst the vessel is detained is significant.

Charterer’s Piracy Trade Disruption Insurance ensures that if a vessel is captured and the Charterer remains liable for the hire, the Charterer is covered for that payment whilst the vessel is seized.

The Cover
Importantly, the cover is available on both a single breach and annual basis.  This allows Charterers to declare vessels for the specific period, whilst transiting or calling at ports in high risk areas.

The premium is based upon the limit of liability required, the number of calls or transits and voyages contemplated and is fully supported by ‘A’ rated London insurers with a proven track record in specialist marine insurance.

___________________________________________________________________________
The above information is intended solely as a summary of the cover – for full details regarding the conditions of cover, exclusions and definitions, please email or telephone your usual FP Marine Risks contact or call the Hong Kong office on +852 2544 3410, the London office on +44 (0) 207 397 4920 or email info@fp‐marine.com

The challenge for credit and political risk insurers is considering the numerous factors that affect the markets in which they operate. Global trends affect the demand for business and local issues determine how they structure cover for their clients. Oliver O’Connell looks at a snapshot of the Asian credit and political risk insurance market and the wider external factors and detailed internal issues that affect it.

“The first trend to take into account in the region is the increase in intra-Asian trade. This has been increasing over the last few years, and while business between Asia and Europe and North America has always been there, intra-Asia business is certainly a much greater percentage of the total than it was two or three years ago,” observes Jeremy Hampshire of Hong Kong-based Trade Line, the specialist trade credit and political risk insurance broker.

“The second trend, which follows on from that, which is obviously a global trend – is the movement from LC to open account. In Asia this has manifested itself as European and US buyers saying that this is the only way we are going to trade from now on. If you combine these two trends you end up with higher credit and political risk, especially credit, for companies within Asia, and their trading. It doesn’t matter where they’re trading, but this has led to an increased requirement for trade credit insurance,” he adds.

In terms of the most affected trade sectors, the trend began a few years ago with the transition to open account in the electronics industry. Following on from this was also a shift in the textiles industry amounting to approximately 65% of transactions by early 2005. Other trade sectors showing a similar trend include plastics, chemicals, steel, and some soft commodities.

This is also leading to a trend in which payment terms are being pushed out. Starting with a move extending payment terms from 15 days to 30, this has eventually been pushed as far as 60 days. These companies now have higher accounts receivables on their balance sheet for the same amount of business than they did one or two years ago. This means higher risk and supposedly more trade credit insurance opportunities.

In the last 18 months underwriters report to have seen a 25% increase in business, if not 30% in some areas, and in line with global trends, brokers have seen a 25-35% increase in enquiries over the same period.

Increased competition
Greater demand for insurance has seen an increase in interest in Asia from insurers, with a number of new office openings, cooperation agreements and new initiatives. Says Hampshire: “The main brokers have never made a big commitment to this class of insurance. They may have done so in Singapore for example, but they don’t have a significant presence. So things have been left largely to individual operators.”

In March, Trade Line entered into a strategic alliance with Cosmos Services Company giving the company access to a network of offices across Asia, as well as in London. For Cosmos, part of Japan’s Itochu Corporation, the aim of alliance is to expand its trade credit and political risk insurance field to better serve its client base. Trade Line still operates as a separate independent unit but now is a greater presence within the industry.

On the more specialist side of the industry, FP Marine Risks, the Hong Kong-headquartered specialist marine insurance broker, has launched a new trade finance initiative aimed at providing specifically designed marine insurance products for the industry.

Philip Bilney, executive director of FP Marine Risks, says: “There’s no doubt that in Hong Kong and Asia there is a growing need for trade financing banks to protect their marine exposures. By launching this initiative, we are leveraging our existing portfolio of specialist marine insurance services to address this need.”

Spearheading the new initiative is Audrey Poon, a broker with 16 years of experience in the insurance industry who joins FP Marine Risks as manager, trade finance. Having spent the past decade specialising in marine cargo insurance for trade financiers and international commodity traders in Singapore, Poon is aiming to help similar companies in Hong Kong minimize their risk in what FP Marine Risks see as an increasingly volatile market.

In the underwriting section of the insurance business, the major players are increasing their presence in the region. Atradius is establishing an office in Hong Kong at the moment and is investigating obtaining a license for China as well. Bermuda-based Exporters Insurance Company is establishing a representative office in Hong Kong in what is described as a prelude to the expansion of Exporters’ activities in the region through growing contact with local brokers. It is expected that Ace will also look to develop in Asia, perhaps using Japan as a platform for expansion into the rest of the region.

Hampshire adds: “A lot of the other majors are here already so perhaps some of the niche players will want to increase their presence here. We certainly get more visits of representatives from the majors coming through than three or four years ago. The general feeling is that there is more business going on in Asia and Latin America than elsewhere, and given the situation in Latin America at the moment, Asia seems preferable.”

In conjunction with this increased interest in the region is an increase in people moves within the industry. There is a level of opportunity, but with factors such as the cultural difference between Europe and Asia it is difficult for companies to simply parachute someone in and expect them to be able to create new business in a short time. Underwriters claim that with a lack of ‘home-grown’ specialist brokers, they have to spend more time on direct marketing and direct sales and cannot just rely on broker channels to drive business.

Active markets
In terms of the markets within the region that are driving business, China, unsurprisingly, leads the way in generating enquiries. Business coming from China is more for credit insurance rather than political, but most other active markets in the region are weighted more in the favour of requests for political risk coverage. For example, the Philippines, Indonesia and Vietnam all generate more political than credit insurance requests.

The challenge of low pricing that has featured across the world has been especially prominent in Asia with rates falling dramatically in most countries. Of the above mentioned countries, Indonesia and Vietnam have dropped quite significantly, though the Philippines and China have maintained similar pricing levels to the recent past.

Indonesia is of particular concern in that some brokers feel that margins have dropped to the extent that perhaps things have gone down by too much against the potential risk in the country. Mining has proved an especially strong sector for political risk insurance, Martin Phelan, head of political risk for the Pacific region at Marsh in Melbourne, comments: “We’ve done a number of transactions in lease and asset finance for mining equipment. For example in the coal sector in Kalimantan, Indonesia, where the client is supporting international contract mining companies by using asset finance as an alternate structure to pure project finance or traditional on balance sheet debt.”

In this instance the mining company required limited recourse project finance to develop $300 million copper-gold project on which it had completed a bankable feasibility study. The project is located in a sparsely populated country with limited infrastructure – physical, commercial and legal – very low income levels and virtually no history of foreign investment or financing other than that provided by development agencies. The mining laws and regulation that did exist was untested at the time.

Understandably the banks were concerned with the risks involved – the stability of key property rights including government commitment on issues such as royalties and the right to export minerals, the reliability and transparency of the legal system and the remoteness, and therefore possible vulnerability, of the project.

Marsh brought together a syndicate of political risk insurers to ensure that commercial lenders had the appropriate coverage against a range of actions and events that could affect the project.

High commodity prices across the globe over the last two to three years have been driven this mining and oil and gas boom causing a reasonably pronounced upturn in new projects and investment. This is channelling into copper, gold and other base metal mine development and the consolidation of project financing schemes in addition to new exploration and extraction of oil and gas deposits.

Phelan highlights the opportunities available for insurers: “A lot of the transactions we’ve been involved in are still creating further opportunities, medium to large project finance-based copper and gold projects, including in some new countries such as Laos. The commercial market facilitated the entry of foreign investment into the country over the last three years, and by the close of this year, total foreign investment over the last five years – largely from Australian companies in the mining sector – amounts to over $1 billion.”

As demonstrated by the Kalimantan mining project, it is localised issues, not global trends that determine the details of political risk coverage. The Philippines and Papua New Guinea tend to be both the hottest and most contentious markets for enquiries and are dominated by local risk factors.

On a national level the Philippines is a highly attractive country geologically for mine development, but is also a challenging country politically with a range of cultural-cum-political issues. The influence of the Catholic Church is just one of the political and cultural challenges faced by foreign investors in new mining projects, as it is a strong vocal force and strident agitator against new projects because of their environmental, social and cultural impacts.

Phelan comments: “At Marsh we get involved in very distinct regional, national, provincial and even local issues. Political risk is not just about sovereign government issues. For example Papua New Guinea has very high levels of tribal diversity especially in the southern highlands – nationally there are as many as 700 tribes and 700 different dialects. The devil is in the detail when providing cover to projects in regions such as this. It doesn’t necessarily stop deals getting done, but it can be highly intimidating as a challenge in the market. So you need to have the knowledge and ability to come to grips with what the issues are and how they can be managed.”

While it may be wider global factors that moderate the wider market trends and flows of business, it is the location-specific issues and the ability of both the underwriters and brokers to come to grips with them that determines success and failure in a regional market. There is no shortcut to developing workable market knowledge.

Philip Bilney is an Executive Director at FP Marine Risks, the first Asian broker to receive full Lloyd’s accreditation in its own right. He heads up FP Marine Risks’ Hong Kong Office.

Q1: Why and when was FP Marine Risks set up?

A1: The company was set up in January 1994. At the time, the Asian marketplace was characterised by multi-national broking houses who maintained very little in-house marine expertise, and certainly not across all marine lines. There were no regional brokers with the skills and knowledge required in this market sector, which created a clear opportunity to set up a specialist marine broker.

We have been able to successfully grow within that marine niche since then, and today we have 33 staff in the Hong Kong office and 47 in total.

Q2: Hong Kong is a competitive market – how does FP Marine Risks stand out?

A2: Above all else we differentiate ourselves by remaining focused on our marine specialisation.

All of our tools, resources and processes are designed with that very much in mind, which I think benefits all parties involved.

Many people also comment on the energy and drive of the company. There is a sense of urgency in the place, which I think is vitally important to clients.

Q3: What classes and areas do you specialise in?

A3: All marine classes and all Asian countries. As might be expected, we are finding that China and India are attracting most attention these days, but the rest of Asia Pacific shouldn’t be ignored. There is growth almost everywhere in the region.

Q4: Why did you apply for Lloyd’s broker accreditation?

A4: As individuals we came from a Lloyd’s background so it was an easy decision for us, particularly given Lloyd’s’ pivotal role in our business.

This was further reinforced by the fact that we were keen to be able to conduct our dialogue with the Lloyd’s market without the need to involve third parties, which meant of course having a direct presence in London.

Q5: What do you find is the perception of Lloyd’s in the local market?

A5: Lloyd’s has the best brand and the best name recognition in the business. Perhaps because of that some Asian buyers of insurance perceive Lloyd’s to be expensive, even though we all know that isn’t necessarily the case. So we sometimes have to overcome that obstacle.

There is also a certain mystique about Lloyd’s, making it appear perhaps rather elitist, which can actually help to attract business sometimes. But at the end of the day, price considerations almost invariably prevail.

The insurance market in Asia tends to see Lloyd’s as remote and a little aloof. However more recently there has been a realisation that Lloyd’s has been modernising rapidly and becoming more professional. Lloyd’s chain of security is generally recognised as a powerful asset.

Q6: You have just received your full accreditation as a Lloyd’s broker – how will this help your business?

A6: It demonstrates that we have placed substantial and growing amounts of business into Lloyd’s over the last three years. It also shows that we have met the standards of Lloyd’s brokers, and from a Hong Kong perspective this demonstrates professionalism and credibility.

There are a number of current London market initiatives, such as contract certainty, which of course we buy into as a Lloyd’s broker. But we have also made a conscious decision to extend the same initiatives into Asia – we want to deploy these improvements in professional standards as widely as possible.

Q7: FP Marine Risks opened a London office – why was this?

A7: We opened the office in London in August 2003 as we knew we needed it in order to operate effectively as an accredited broker. We found it essential to have a presence on the ground, and since then have been able to recruit a number of specialist brokers in our office there.

We have two routes to Lloyd’s underwriters – the first is directly from Hong Kong by email to underwriters in the Room. Some underwriters have been adept at changing their own practices to accommodate this and in practice can work with us in the same way that a local underwriter can – a Lloyd’s underwriter who replies to us first thing in the morning in the UK will sometimes have responded more quickly than his Asian-based competitors. This is important to us and has worked well.

The second route is via our brokers on the ground in London. Dealing directly with a broker 7,000 miles away from Lime Street requires a particular mindset, so we find having the two approaches essential.

We now have 12 people in London and nine who regularly walk around the Room, which has had a massive impact on our profile in Lloyd’s. Having a fully operational London office also sometimes presents us with new business opportunities – being Asian specialists we often get referrals and enquiries related to the region.

The more we become engaged in London the more it becomes apparent that London and Lloyd’s remain the epicentre of marine insurance. There is tremendous value in the way Lloyd’s operates – it enjoys a unique physical marketplace that is just not found in other centres around the world.

Q8: Do you see syndicates setting up in Asia having an advantage?

A8: Yes, the syndicates who set up in Asia are in the front-line and as such are much more likely to see a greater choice of risks, and to understand the market better.

It’s worth bearing in mind that marine underwriters operating in Asia are generally doing well. Although rating levels here are often lower than in other parts of the world, claims tend to be as well.

Q9: FP Marine Risks recently set up a Melbourne office – what was the rationale for this?

A9: Australia and New Zealand are markets that suit us perfectly in terms of language and legal systems, and of course they share similar time zones to Hong Kong. But they can also be quite introverted markets, and therefore a presence on the ground is essential. So when the opportunity presented itself we were very keen to quickly establish ourselves.

I’m very pleased to say that the office is doing well – we are seeing business that is of high-quality and well-presented. It’s tremendously exciting.

Q10: What are your predictions for the Hong Kong and regional market for ten years time?

A10: I hope and expect that Hong Kong will still be the key regional Financial Centre for Asia in ten years time – it has all the infrastructure that it needs for that, and many advantages over Shanghai or other cities.

Many people expect China to continue on its path of tremendous growth and reform, and I’m sure that will be the case. But it won’t all be in a straight, trouble-free line – expect many bumps to come. The insurance market there will no doubt continue to develop and open up, and the indigenous insurers will continue to become more sophisticated. The old polarisation of the market into one or two huge players will never return.

Q11: What is the future for FP Marine Risks?

A11: We will continue to be marine specialists – that focus has worked well for us. I see huge and exciting potential for considerably more growth for us in the Asia-Pacific region, and indeed elsewhere around the world.
Philip was in conversation with Alex Faris, Lloyd’s General Representative for Hong Kong

Brokers are becoming an “essential part of the insurance buying process” in Asia, according to Lloyd’s first accredited broker in the region.

Philip Bilney, executive director of FP Marine Risks, says that although there is a well-established market in Asia already, there is still a lot of potential for growth. He adds that the time is right for brokers who want to start offering their services in the region.

“As a developing market, the primary distribution channels have traditionally been via insurance company agents,” he says. “But as risks become more complicated and buyers more sophisticated, brokers are becoming an ever more essential part of the insurance buying process.” This sentiment echoes the findings of recent research conducted by Lloyd’s which found that there is significant and growing demand for specialist services offered by commercial brokers.

Bilney adds: “Looking at the region as a whole, the insurance industry is more experienced and better founded than it was a decade ago. The Asian market is more mature and has more experienced individuals within it.”

Bilney believes that this has in part been reinforced by the Lloyd’s syndicates established in Asia over the last several years.

“From our perspective, the Lloyd’s market is enormously relevant,” he says. “It’s at the hub of marine insurance worldwide. It has far more experience than any other single market or body of underwriters. There are very few risk types which are entirely new to Lloyd’s underwriters, so it’s not just about innovation, but experience and expertise.”

The Lloyd’s market is also willing to commit substantial capacity to specialised or complex risks, the kind that some Asian international insurance companies might be more wary of, according to Bilney.

FP Marine Risks is a specialist marine insurance broker with offices in Hong Kong, London, Melbourne and Taipei, operating in key markets such as Asia, London, continental Europe, the United States and the Middle East.