Cedric Stephens | Melissa exposed gaps: Better governance, claims metrics, and deadlines.

When Hurricane Melissa tore through Jamaica last year, the devastation was swift and merciless. Roofs were ripped away, livelihoods disrupted, and communities left scrambling to restore some semblance of normality. Amid the chaos, one truth emerged with startling clarity: people showed up, but insurance providers, for the most part, were missing in action.

Andrew Houston Moncure, managing director of Bluefields Bay Villas & Suites in Westmoreland, captured this reality in his June 3 Jamaica Observer article, ‘After Melissa, our community showed up, our insurer did not’. His account is not merely a personal grievance; it is a case study in systemic failure.

INSURERS STEPPED BACK

Moncure describes how his team mobilised immediately after Melissa. They distributed over 16,000 hot meals, delivered building supplies, provided labour, and ran generators and communications for neighbours. Bluefields Bay Villas became a hub of relief and resilience.

In contrast, his company’s insurer remained silent. Despite three decades of loyal premium payments, the company’s claim was neither acknowledged nor processed. Regulation No. 135, he wrote, requires settlement of valid claims within 30 days, and the Financial Services Commission’s (FSC) Market Conduct Rules mandate “fair” and “transparent” claims procedures. These obligations were ignored.

This is not an isolated incident. Across Jamaica, policyholders report similar frustrations: unanswered calls, delayed inspections, and claims languishing in limbo. The result is a widening gap between the promise of insurance and the lived reality of disaster recovery.

THE REGULATORY BLIND SPOT

Moncure pointed out that Jamaica’s regulator has historically prioritised prudential supervision — ensuring insurers remain solvent — over consumer protection. While solvency is critical, it is meaningless if policyholders cannot access the coverage they paid for.

The FSC’s rules exist on paper, but enforcement is weak or non-existent. Without statutory deadlines for written acknowledgement of catastrophe claims and assignment of a named adjuster, insurers can delay indefinitely. This undermines trust not only in individual companies, but in the insurance system itself.

LESSONS FROM GLOBAL EXPERIENCE?

In a recent Gleaner article, I examined how claim delays have slowed recovery in other jurisdictions. After Hurricane Dorian in The Bahamas, Maria in Dominica, and Katrina, Ida and Ian in the United States, the pattern was the same: families and businesses could not rebuild without timely payouts.

The root causes are familiar: 1) Shortage of qualified adjusters. 2) Disrupted infrastructure; 3) Rising rebuilding costs; 4) Complex business interruption claims; and 5) Weak regulatory oversight. The bottleneck is not financial — it is operational. Why have the industry and the regulators not learnt lessons from the experiences of other countries? Why haven't members of parliament posed questions on these subjects during the Sectoral Debate? Corporate governance, at its core, is about accountability and transparency in decision-making. Shouldn’t this item fall under the regulatory umbrella?

THE CASE FOR TRANSPARENT METRICS

One of my key recommendations was the regular publication of industry metrics in relation to events like Melissa: number of catastrophe claims received; number acknowledged within statutory timelines; number settled, outstanding, and disputed; average settlement times; and complaints lodged and resolved.

Such transparency would allow regulators, policymakers, and the public to track performance in real time. It would also create competitive pressure: insurers that consistently lag behind peers would face reputational consequences.

Imagine if, within 30 days of Melissa, the FSC had published a dashboard showing claims progress across the industry. Policyholders would know whether delays were systemic or confined to specific companies. Regulators could intervene early. And insurers would be held accountable not only to their shareholders, but to the communities they serve.

TECHNOLOGY AS A FORCE MULTIPLIER

Another recommendation was the use of technology to accelerate claims processing. Drones and satellite imagery can assess roof damage within hours. Mobile apps can allow policyholders to upload photos and track claim status. Artificial intelligence can triage claims, flagging complex cases for human adjusters while fast-tracking straightforward ones.

These tools are not futuristic; they are already in use in markets like Florida and California. Jamaica’s insurers must adopt them to meet the expectations of a digitally literate customer base.

Taken together, Moncure’s observations and my recommendations point to a clear reform agenda: 

This is not about punishing insurers; it is about restoring balance. Insurance is a social contract: policyholders pay premiums in good faith, and insurers promise to provide financial relief when disaster strikes. When that contract is broken, the consequences ripple far beyond individual households.

THE RISKS OF INACTION 

If reforms are not implemented, Jamaica faces three risks. First, continued erosion of trust: policyholders may question the value of insurance, leading to underinsurance and greater vulnerability in future disasters. Second, economic drag: businesses such as Bluefields Bay Villas shoulder recovery costs, diverting resources from growth and employment. Third, regulatory credibility: the FSC risks further reputational damage if rules remain unenforced, weakening its authority across other areas of financial regulation.

A CALL TO ACTION

Melissa was a wake-up call. Our communities proved their resilience; our insurers exposed their fragility. The solution lies not in rhetoric, but in enforceable timelines, transparent metrics, and a regulator that treats consumer protection as seriously as solvency.

The Insurance Association of Jamaica and the FSC must act now. Adopting a ‘twin peaks’ model of regulation: one peak for prudential stability, the other for consumer fairness. Publish monthly catastrophe claims metrics. Mandate statutory deadlines for acknowledgement and settlement. Require insurers to deploy technology that accelerates inspections and updates. Only then can we ensure that when the next storm comes — and it will — our communities will not stand alone.

If you require assistance managing risks or solving insurance problems, Cedric E. Stephens offers free counsel and advice. To obtain information and counsel, please write to The Business Editor at business@gleanerjm.com or contact Mr Stephens directly at aegisja@gmail.com. Letters and e-mails will be edited for clarity and length.

June 18, 2026.