2222222222

The Law

Legal Spotlight

A look at the latest decisions impacting the industry.
By: | May 2, 2017 • 4 min read

Losses Due to Emails Not Covered

On june 4, 2012, an employee of accounting firm Taylor & Lieberman (T&L) received an email from a client requesting a wire transfer to a bank account in Malaysia in the amount of $94,280.

After complying with those instructions, she received another email the next day, requesting an additional $98,486 be wired to a bank in Singapore. The employee again complied. A third email request, in the amount of $128,101, raised suspicions because of a different email address.

A phone call confirmed that all three emails were fraudulent. T&L was able to recover nearly all of the monies from the first transfer, but none from the second.

The accounting firm used its own funds to reimburse the client and then sought reimbursement under its crime coverage with Federal Insurance Co., which denied the claim on June 13, 2012.

Two years later, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ruled the firm was not entitled to coverage. On March 9, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed.

The policy, the court ruled, provided coverage for “an insured’s direct loss ‘resulting from forgery or alteration of a financial instrument by a third party.’ ” In this case, there were no financial instruments, just emails instructing the firm to wire money.

Advertisement




The court also dismissed T&L’s argument that the claim was covered by computer fraud coverage because the emails were an unauthorized entry into its system.
“The ‘mere sending’ of emails does not amount to actionable trespass to a computer system,” ruled the 9th Circuit, which dismissed the case.

Scorecard: The accounting firm’s claim for $98,486 was denied.

Takeaway: The “common sense reading of the policy” contradicted the accounting firm’s arguments, the court ruled.

Insurer Must Pay for Appeal

On dec. 13, 2011, a federal grand jury indicted Mitchell Stein on 14 counts of mail, wire and securities fraud, saying he artificially inflated the stock of Heart Tronics (also known as Signalife), a medical device company.

On Dec. 20, 2011, the SEC filed a civil suit against Stein and Heart Tronics for securities fraud and falsification of records.

Stein, a founder of the company who called himself its “chief creative architect,” was found guilty of the criminal charges, sentenced to 17 years in prison and ordered to repay $5 million in “illegally-gained profits” on May 20, 2013. The SEC action resulted in Stein being ordered to pay $5.4 million.

After his criminal conviction (which subsequently was remanded for resentencing earlier this year), Stein sought defense for an appeal from Houston Casualty Co., which had issued a $5 million directors and officers policy in November 2007.

HCC denied the claim, saying the policy provided coverage only until a “final determination,” which it said was the conviction. It also argued that Stein was not an officer or director of the company.

Stein filed suit, and lost in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. That decision was reversed by the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, on March 8.

Even though Stein denied being an officer of the company in other court proceedings, his statements “do not contradict” the argument that Stein was the functional equivalent of an officer or director during the HCC policy period, the court ruled.

It also said the policy defined a claim as “any civil or criminal proceeding, and expressly included ‘an appeal from any such proceeding.’ ”

Scorecard: The insurance company must pay for the costs to appeal the conviction.

Takeaway: A “thing that is ‘final until reversed’ is not final,” the court ruled.

Maritime vs. State Law

In february 2011, peter savoie and matt delahoussaye used a crane barge to attempt to dislodge solid objects from inside an offshore well in the Atchafalaya Basin in Louisiana.

Savoie was preparing to disconnect the hydraulic gate valve from the crane when the crane came toward him and knocked him off balance. He tried to clutch the crane, but lost his grip and fell about 8 feet, resulting in a “crush-type injury to the right lower extremity.”

Savoie eventually settled his claims against his employer, Specialty Rental Tools & Supply (STS). The master services contract (MSC) had required STS to indemnify Apache Corp., which had hired STS to perform the “flow-back process” on its fixed production platform.

The MSC stated it should be enforced under maritime law unless it was inapplicable.

Even though the injury case was settled, crane owner Larry Doiron Inc. and crane operator Robert Jackson, both of whom are part of Apache, sought a court ruling that would “enforce their contractual right to defense and indemnification” under admiralty law.

Advertisement




Zurich American Insurance Co., which had issued the policy for the MSC, argued the indemnity provision was void under the Louisiana Oilfield Indemnity Act.

The U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana agreed with Doiron and Jackson that it had a right to defense and indemnity, and that state law did not apply. On appeal by STS, Zurich and Oil States Energy Services, the U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals on Feb. 23 agreed.

While flow-back activities have little to do with traditional maritime activity, it ruled, a vessel was necessary to do the work.

Scorecard: The insurer must defend and indemnify the barge owner.

Takeaway: Because the operation could not be completed with the vessel’s crane, the case was decided under maritime law.

Anne Freedman is managing editor of Risk & Insurance. She can be reached at [email protected]

More from Risk & Insurance

More from Risk & Insurance

Cyber Resilience

No, Seriously. You Need a Comprehensive Cyber Incident Response Plan Before It’s Too Late.

Awareness of cyber risk is increasing, but some companies may be neglecting to prepare adequate response plans that could save them millions. 
By: | June 1, 2018 • 7 min read

To minimize the financial and reputational damage from a cyber attack, it is absolutely critical that businesses have a cyber incident response plan.

“Sadly, not all yet do,” said David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy.

Advertisement




In the event of a breach, a company must be able to quickly identify and contain the problem, assess the level of impact, communicate internally and externally, recover where possible any lost data or functionality needed to resume business operations and act quickly to manage potential reputational risk.

This can only be achieved with help from the right external experts and the design and practice of a well-honed internal response.

The first step a company must take, said Legassick, is to understand its cyber exposures through asset identification, classification, risk assessment and protection measures, both technological and human.

According to Raf Sanchez, international breach response manager, Beazley, cyber-response plans should be flexible and applicable to a wide range of incidents, “not just a list of consecutive steps.”

They also should bring together key stakeholders and specify end goals.

Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

With bad actors becoming increasingly sophisticated and often acting in groups, attack vectors can hit companies from multiple angles simultaneously, meaning a holistic approach is essential, agreed Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions.

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.”

This means assembling a response team including individuals from IT, legal, operations, risk management, HR, finance and the board — each of whom must be well drilled in their responsibilities in the event of a breach.

“You can’t pick your players on the day of the game,” said Hogg. “Response times are critical, so speed and timing are of the essence. You should also have a very clear communication plan to keep the CEO and board of directors informed of recommended courses of action and timing expectations.”

People on the incident response team must have sufficient technical skills and access to critical third parties to be able to make decisions and move to contain incidents fast. Knowledge of the company’s data and network topology is also key, said Legassick.

“Perhaps most important of all,” he added, “is to capture in detail how, when, where and why an incident occurred so there is a feedback loop that ensures each threat makes the cyber defense stronger.”

Cyber insurance can play a key role by providing a range of experts such as forensic analysts to help manage a cyber breach quickly and effectively (as well as PR and legal help). However, the learning process should begin before a breach occurs.

Practice Makes Perfect

“Any incident response plan is only as strong as the practice that goes into it,” explained Mike Peters, vice president, IT, RIMS — who also conducts stress testing through his firm Sentinel Cyber Defense Advisors.

Advertisement




Unless companies have an ethical hacker or certified information security officer on board who can conduct sophisticated simulated attacks, Peters recommended they hire third-party experts to test their networks for weaknesses, remediate these issues and retest again for vulnerabilities that haven’t been patched or have newly appeared.

“You need to plan for every type of threat that’s out there,” he added.

Hogg agreed that bringing third parties in to conduct tests brings “fresh thinking, best practice and cross-pollination of learnings from testing plans across a multitude of industries and enterprises.”

“Collaboration is key — you have to take silos down and work in a cross-functional manner.” — Jason J. Hogg, CEO, Aon Cyber Solutions

Legassick added that companies should test their plans at least annually, updating procedures whenever there is a significant change in business activity, technology or location.

“As companies expand, cyber security is not always front of mind, but new operations and territories all expose a company to new risks.”

For smaller companies that might not have the resources or the expertise to develop an internal cyber response plan from whole cloth, some carriers offer their own cyber risk resources online.

Evan Fenaroli, an underwriting product manager with the Philadelphia Insurance Companies (PHLY), said his company hosts an eRiskHub, which gives PHLY clients a place to start looking for cyber event response answers.

That includes access to a pool of attorneys who can guide company executives in creating a plan.

“It’s something at the highest level that needs to be a priority,” Fenaroli said. For those just getting started, Fenaroli provided a checklist for consideration:

  • Purchase cyber insurance, read the policy and understand its notice requirements.
  • Work with an attorney to develop a cyber event response plan that you can customize to your business.
  • Identify stakeholders within the company who will own the plan and its execution.
  • Find outside forensics experts that the company can call in an emergency.
  • Identify a public relations expert who can be called in the case of an event that could be leaked to the press or otherwise become newsworthy.

“When all of these things fall into place, the outcome is far better in that there isn’t a panic,” said Fenaroli, who, like others, recommends the plan be tested at least annually.

Cyber’s Physical Threat

With the digital and physical worlds converging due to the rise of the Internet of Things, Hogg reminded companies: “You can’t just test in the virtual world — testing physical end-point security is critical too.”

Advertisement




How that testing is communicated to underwriters should also be a key focus, said Rich DePiero, head of cyber, North America, Swiss Re Corporate Solutions.

Don’t just report on what went well; it’s far more believable for an underwriter to hear what didn’t go well, he said.

“If I hear a client say it is perfect and then I look at some of the results of the responses to breaches last year, there is a disconnect. Help us understand what you learned and what you worked out. You want things to fail during these incident response tests, because that is how we learn,” he explained.

“Bringing in these outside firms, detailing what they learned and defining roles and responsibilities in the event of an incident is really the best practice, and we are seeing more and more companies do that.”

Support from the Board

Good cyber protection is built around a combination of process, technology, learning and people. While not every cyber incident needs to be reported to the boardroom, senior management has a key role in creating a culture of planning and risk awareness.

David Legassick, head of life sciences, tech and cyber, CNA Hardy

“Cyber is a boardroom risk. If it is not taken seriously at boardroom level, you are more than likely to suffer a network breach,” Legassick said.

However, getting board buy-in or buy-in from the C-suite is not always easy.

“C-suite executives often put off testing crisis plans as they get in the way of the day job. The irony here is obvious given how disruptive an incident can be,” said Sanchez.

“The C-suite must demonstrate its support for incident response planning and that it expects staff at all levels of the organization to play their part in recovering from serious incidents.”

“What these people need from the board is support,” said Jill Salmon, New York-based vice president, head of cyber/tech/MPL, Berkshire Hathaway Specialty Insurance.

“I don’t know that the information security folks are looking for direction from the board as much as they are looking for support from a resources standpoint and a visibility standpoint.

“They’ve got to be aware of what they need and they need to have the money to be able to build it up to that level,” she said.

Without that support, according to Legassick, failure to empower and encourage the IT team to manage cyber threats holistically through integration with the rest of the organization, particularly risk managers, becomes a common mistake.

He also warned that “blame culture” can prevent staff from escalating problems to management in a timely manner.

Collaboration and Communication

Given that cyber incident response truly is a team effort, it is therefore essential that a culture of collaboration, preparation and practice is embedded from the top down.

Advertisement




One of the biggest tripping points for companies — and an area that has done the most damage from a reputational perspective — is in how quickly and effectively the company communicates to the public in the aftermath of a cyber event.

Salmon said of all the cyber incident response plans she has seen, the companies that have impressed her most are those that have written mock press releases and rehearsed how they are going to respond to the media in the aftermath of an event.

“We have seen so many companies trip up in that regard,” she said. “There have been examples of companies taking too long and then not explaining why it took them so long. It’s like any other crisis — the way that you are communicating it to the public is really important.” &

Antony Ireland is a London-based financial journalist. He can be reached at [email protected] Dan Reynolds is editor-in-chief of Risk & Insurance. He can be reached at [email protected]