Digital follow underwriting that shows a follower only where its terms differ from the lead
A follow decision in minutes, every difference from the lead's terms listed.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Writing follow lines on subscription placements through a digital process instead of re-reading every slip by hand. Digital Follow Underwriting reads the slip and every lead endorsement, greys out each line your syndicate has already accepted, checks the line against your authority and aggregates, and leaves only the lines where your terms differ for the follow underwriter to decide and stamp.
How to choose AI solutions for insurance →
Updated
On a subscription placement the lead underwriter agrees the contract, and every follow market writes a line behind it. Each follower still has to decide its line, test the slip against its own authority and appetite, and agree any change the leader makes after firm order. So every follow team opens the whole Market Reform Contract — fifty-odd lines, nearly all of them word for word what it wrote last year or accepted from the same leader last month.
The lines that matter are a handful: the line size against the max line and the aggregates, a clause the follower's rules require or forbid, a deductible the leader cut two days after firm order. They are found by reading, or they are missed. A Part 2 change the leader agreed without you is a contract-certainty gap that waits for a claim. And brokers send their follow lines to the markets that answer first.
Estimated split of a five-day week on follow requests, by hand and with the solution.
Five agents read the slip, grey out what you have accepted and check your authority; the follow underwriter stamps.
Fairlie Hobbs Placement wants Fenmarch Syndicate's line on the Orsova Packaging property D&F renewal by Wednesday. Wexcombe leads at 15%. Here is Monday morning, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Six requests are due to Ines. She opens Orsova Packaging Group plc: UMR B1427FH2611803, 12 months at 1 Nov 2026, Wexcombe 15%, written so far 118.5%, Martha Okafor asking for 10%. Above the slip one bar of 54 cells reads “Nothing new: 89%” — 44 lines as Fenmarch wrote them in 2025, 4 as accepted on other Wexcombe slips, 4 changed inside her rules, 2 where her terms differ.
“48 of 54 lines are identical to lines Fenmarch has already accepted · 2 differ”
The firm order slip and both lead endorsements were read into 54 lines across six sections, each kept in Wexcombe's wording with its clause numbers. “Replay the read” shows what happened: the slip starts in full ink and each line Fenmarch has already accepted turns grey, with “as 2025” or “dates rolled” beside it, while the bar fills.
A near match is “changed”, never “accepted”. Dates rolled forward a year count as identical.
The run log beside the slip says what each agent did: 44 lines identical to the 2025 Orsova contract, 4 more matched against 37 Wexcombe slips Fenmarch wrote in 12 months, LE-02 flagged as GUA Part 2, nine authority checks with two failing, and a proposed line of 7.5% subject to LMA5401 waiting for Ines.
Wexcombe moved from the LMA5401 property cyber exclusion to LMA5400, which writes back fire and explosion following a non-malicious cyber incident. Fenmarch's rule P-04 requires LMA5401 for international property. The margin gives Ines two choices: “Subject to LMA5401”, as written in 2025, or “Accept LMA5400”, a departure from a required clause that Declan Moore signs off.
“Your terms differ — the leader moved from LMA5401 to LMA5400; Fenmarch's rule requires LMA5401.”
The broker's request is 10% of the USD 750m limit. Fenmarch's max line for international property is USD 60m (rule P-02), so 8% is the most it can write. The checker proposes 7.5% — the share Fenmarch wrote in 2025 — at USD 56.25m exposure and an expected signed line of 6.33% at 118.5% written. Ines can pick 5, 6, 7.5 or 8%.
The checker never proposes a line above authority.
Authority shows the line size on a scale against the max line and the 10% asked, then every check: personal authority USD 60m, no peer review needed under USD 75m, technical price 103%, territory UK, Netherlands and USA, sanctions clear with the JV partner by subjectivity, Wexcombe on the approved leaders list. At 7.5% the Gulf named windstorm aggregate goes from USD 412m to USD 430.75m of the USD 500m cap.
Two days after firm order Hugo Tennant agreed LE-02: the named windstorm deductible cut from 5% to 3% of location values, minimum USD 10m. Under GUA Part 2 it needs every underwriter. The watcher shows the effect on Fenmarch: at Port Ansel, USD 1.32bn, the deductible falls from USD 66m to USD 39.6m, and Fenmarch's 7.5% share of a full windstorm loss rises by up to USD 1.98m.
The watcher never agrees a change for Fenmarch. Every Part 2 change reaches a person.
Ines marks the four changes inside her rules seen, agrees LE-02, and stamps. The ink lands on the slip's security details: FENMARCH SYNDICATE · 7.5% · subject to LMA5401 · FEN-PDF-26-0418 · IW · 12 Oct 2026. The bar now reads 96%, with the two differences decided.
“Stamped · 7.5% of Orsova Packaging · six minutes from open to stamp”
The record holds the written line, premium USD 1,380,000 gross at 12.5% brokerage, the line condition, the lead changes agreed, the checks as at the stamp and the reason — drafted by the follow recorder and edited by Ines. The audit trail lists people and agents alike, from Hugo Tennant agreeing LE-02 to Ines's stamp. From here she sends the line to the broker or books it.
The recorder drafts; it never stamps or sends.
Orsova's subjectivities move onto the register with every other followed line: an engineering survey of Port Ansel within 60 days of inception, and sanctions screening of JV partner Delmora Holdings BV before inception, cleared by Fenmarch compliance. The broker is reminded seven days before each one is due.
The same Orsova request, seen by the four people at Fenmarch who carry it — what their week looked like, and what it looks like now.
Five agents read the slip, grey out what you have accepted and check your authority; the follow underwriter stamps.
Reads the Market Reform Contract and every lead endorsement into lines: section, field, wording, clause numbers and values, with each endorsement applied to the line it changes.
Compares each line with what Fenmarch has already accepted — the prior-year contract for the risk, then the same leader's slips written in the last 12 months, then model clause equivalents — and builds the nothing-new bar.
Applies max line, personal authority, peer review thresholds, aggregates, technical price, territory, sanctions, the approved leaders list and clause positions, and proposes the largest line inside authority — last year's line on a renewal.
Reads every endorsement the leader agrees after firm order, classifies it under the slip's basis of agreement to contract changes (GUA Part 1 or Part 2) and shows its effect on Fenmarch's share.
Drafts the line condition, the reason, the stamp text and the decision record; after the stamp, adds the slip's subjectivities to the register and drafts reminders to the broker.
Decides the line and stamps. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask about this slip, the leader's changes, your authority or your follow requests. Every answer points to the slip line, rule or report it rests on.
Why can’t Fenmarch write the 10% Martha asked for?
Ten percent of the USD 750m limit is USD 75m. Fenmarch’s max line for international property is USD 60m per risk, so 8% is the most you can write. I proposed 7.5%, the share you wrote in 2025: USD 56.25m exposure, USD 1,380,000 premium, and about 6.33% signed at 118.5% written. It also keeps the Gulf windstorm aggregate at USD 430.75m of 500m.
What did Wexcombe change after firm order?
Two endorsements. LE-01 (Thu 8 Oct) corrected the Vellmar address — GUA Part 1, the leader agrees alone. LE-02 (Fri 9 Oct 16:12) cut the named windstorm deductible from 5% to 3% of location values, minimum USD 10m. Deductibles are GUA Part 2, so it needs every underwriter, Fenmarch included.
What is different from last year on Orsova?
Five lines changed since you wrote 7.5% in 2025: limit USD 700m to 750m, BI indemnity 18 to 24 months, windstorm deductible 5% to 3% (LE-02), premium USD 17.25m to 18.4m, and cyber LMA5401 to LMA5400. The first four are inside your rules. The cyber change breaks rule P-04.
Which follow requests can I stamp straight away?
Two: Pennard Cold Stores (Wexcombe 20%, asked 5%, 38 of 38 lines as accepted before) and Brantwood Paper Mills (Carrow 15%, asked 5%, 41 of 41). Every check passes, so you can stamp them from the list. Northmoor Aggregates is close: one changed line inside your rules to mark seen.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
What you will write behind a leader, and what counts as already accepted. Every change is saved as a new rule version with who and why.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Max line · international property D&F | USD 60m per risk | Set per class: ports and terminals, renewable energy, UK commercial property |
| Cyber · LMA5401 exclusion | Required | Required · Accepted · Class underwriter only · Never |
| Cyber · LMA5400 endorsement | Class underwriter only | Required · Accepted · Class underwriter only · Never |
| What counts as accepted before | Prior-year contract, same leader within 12 months, model clause equivalents | Each on or off · slips from other leaders in the same class off |
| GUA Part 2 changes go to the underwriter who wrote the line | On | On · Off |
| Peer review | Over USD 75m exposure, and any departure from a required clause | On · Off, each |
| Stamp from the list when a slip is 100% nothing new | On | On · Off |
| Stamp reference format | FEN-<class>-<yy>-<nnnn> | Your own format |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
“demo” = seen in the working solution, on its sample follow book (the 48-minute figure is the sample syndicate's own estimate for 2025, by hand) · “target” = the design goal, measured in the live solution · “estimated” = our estimate · “typical” = published figures (Lloyd's full-year results 2025, 19 Mar 2026: expense ratio 35.6%). LMA clause numbers and the General Underwriters Agreement are market standards, named as context. Syndicates, brokers, insureds and people named on this page are fictional — characters and sample data in the working solution.
Writing follow lines on subscription placements through a digital process instead of re-reading every slip by hand. Digital Follow Underwriting reads the slip and every lead endorsement, greys out each line your syndicate has already accepted, checks the line against your authority and aggregates, and leaves only the lines where your terms differ for the follow underwriter to decide and stamp.
The accepted-terms matcher compares each line with your prior-year contract for the same risk, then slips from the same leader you wrote in the last 12 months, then model clause equivalents of the same number and edition. Dates rolled forward a year count as identical. Any other change of wording is marked “changed”, with the old value shown.
No. The agents propose a line, a line condition and a reason. Only the follow underwriter decides the line, agrees lead changes and stamps; the class underwriter peer-reviews lines over USD 75m exposure and any departure from a required clause.
The lead change watcher reads every endorsement on arrival and classifies it under the slip's basis of agreement to contract changes — GUA Part 1, which the leader agrees alone, or Part 2, which needs every underwriter. Part 2 changes go to the underwriter who wrote the line, with the effect on your share, and you agree or query them.
No. The authority checker applies max line, personal authority, peer review thresholds, aggregates, technical price, territory, sanctions, the approved leaders list and your clause positions, and proposes the largest line inside authority. On a renewal it prefers last year's line.
The Market Reform Contract or slip as PDF, Word or a placing platform export, lead endorsements from the placing platform feed, your contract history, your follow rules and personal authorities, the accumulation report, your pricing model and sanctions screening.
Yes. Max line by class, personal authorities, clause positions (required, accepted, class underwriter only, never), what counts as accepted before, the late-change watch, peer review thresholds and the stamp reference format are all settings, and every change is saved as a new rule version with who and why.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents — your follow rules, clause positions and a sample of past slips and contracts — and it goes live once every quality gate has passed. We will walk you through it on your own follow requests first.
Control gaps found before the quote, each linked to the answer or scan.
1-min demoCyber Accumulation ManagementExposed insureds and limit listed the day a vendor event breaks.
1-min demoPolicy Wording ComparisonEvery deviation from your form found in minutes, none bound without an approver.
1-min demoWe’ll run Digital Follow Underwriting on a sample of your own follow requests and last year's contracts.