Management liability is written on a claims-made basis, and two dates decide what the policy will answer for: when a claim is made, and the prior-and-pending litigation date before which known matters are excluded. Keep the date from year to year and the client keeps its continuity. Reset it to inception and every matter that began before the reset can fall outside the cover.
On this illustrative renewal the binder kept the prior-and-pending date at March 1, 2019. The issued policy says November 1, 2026 — the inception date. One line on page two. The healthcare group, the carrier and every figure are invented Illustrative.
| Insured | Marrowfield Health Partners, Inc. — a private healthcare group (illustrative) |
|---|---|
| Line | Directors and officers / management liability, renewal |
| Documents | Expiring policy, quote, binder, issued policy |
| What it finds | 43 checks: 42 match, 1 fails — the prior-or-pending litigation date; 4 renewal changes, 2 narrower (the date, and the Side C retention $100,000 → $150,000) |
| Agents involved | Coverage extraction, proofing checker, renewal comparison, forms, supervisor, discrepancy drafter |
| Decisions | Raise the failure with the carrier; practice leader sign-off on the blocking control |
| Outcome | A correction request asking for the 2019 date as bound; the delivery summary will name the higher retention |
Why a date is checked as high severity
In the coverage taxonomy each field carries a severity and a direction. For dates that define the claims-made cover, earlier is broader: an earlier prior-and-pending date leaves fewer matters excluded. A later one narrows cover, and a mismatch against the binder is a high-severity failure.
P&P date 2019-03-01"] --> B["Quote
2019-03-01"] --> C["Binder
2019-03-01"] --> D["Policy
2026-11-01"] D --> E{"Proof: policy
vs binder"} E -->|"differs"| F["Fail · high
cited p.2 / p.2"] D --> G{"Compare: vs
expiring"} G -->|"later"| H["Narrower · high"] style F fill:#ffe4ea,stroke:#e3405f style H fill:#ffe4ea,stroke:#e3405f
Step by step
The D&O taxonomy: aggregate limit, Side A limit, retentions by side, the prior-or-pending date, premium, forms including an entity antitrust coverage endorsement with its own sublimit.
One failure: prior-or-pending litigation date March 1, 2019 on the binder, November 1, 2026 on the policy.
Premium $66,200 → $74,800 (+13%); Side C retention $100,000 → $150,000 (narrower, agreed at quote and binder); the prior-or-pending date (narrower, on the policy only).
Eight form and exclusion checks; nothing to look at. The professional services exclusion with its carve-back was on the binder too.
Delivery blocked by the unresolved high-severity failure; the narrowing must be named. A practice leader sign-off is prepared.
Raises the date with the carrier. The request cites the binder’s page 2 and the policy’s page 2.
Once the corrected date is endorsed and re-proofed, signs a summary that names the higher Side C retention in plain words.
What the screens show
Note what the comparison does with the retention: it was agreed at quote and bound, so it is not a proofing failure, but it is a narrowing against the expiring and the client must be told. The date, by contrast, is both.
What the agents prepared
| Agent | What it prepared | What it cites | Who decides |
|---|---|---|---|
| Proofing checker | Raise 1 failed check with the carrier | Binder p.2, policy p.2 | Account manager |
| Supervisor | Practice leader sign-off: 1 control fired | The unresolved high-severity failure | Practice leader |
| Renewal comparison | 4 changes, 2 narrower | Expiring, quote, binder, policy | — (findings) |
| Section | Hit | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Proofing control | A high-severity check failed and is unresolved | block |
| Proofing control | Cover narrowed at renewal (2 changes) | warn |
| Proofing control | Premium up more than 25% (+13%) | pass |
For the account team
A one-line date difference arrives as a high-severity failure with both pages, not as something to spot on a re-read.
For broker IT
Direction is a property of the canonical field; the same rule reads every carrier’s wording of the date.
For practice leadership
Continuity of claims-made cover is a classic E&O claim against a broker. The record shows it was caught and asked for.
Questions we get asked
What if the carrier insists the date resets?
Then it is a negotiation, and a decision for the account executive and the client. Waiving a high-severity failure requires a reason and refers the check to a practice leader.
Keep reading
A cyber sublimit and a label nobody knew
The quote offered $1M of cyber extortion. The binder says $500K.
Read article
Where InsightProofing sits in the broker suite
Placement hands it the binder; Xtract reads the PDFs; Pulse knows the client; Advocate inherits the policy.
Read article
The first ninety days, and how to measure it
One team, one renewal month, every action at ask first.
Read article