IUMI urges marine insurers to move from claims repair to loss prevention

On 23 September 2026, the International Union of Marine Insurance (IUMI) said marine insurers need to place greater emphasis on preventing losses, as cargo and logistics risks become more complex and more costly to insure. Speaking at IUMI’s annual conference in Rotterdam, Loss Prevention Committee Chair Pascal Dubois described a broader shift from repairing loss after an event to preventing it or reducing its severity beforehand.

This is a market and operational message, not a new rule or mandatory insurance standard. IUMI did not announce a new cargo-claims protocol. Its stated direction is for prevention to become a more integrated part of underwriting and insurance propositions, supported by greater technical capability and more dedicated loss-prevention resources. The conference programme also placed supply-chain fraud, lithium-ion battery risks and ISPM 15 wood-packaging compliance within the Loss Prevention workshop, underlining the breadth of exposures now being considered alongside traditional marine perils.

For cargo interests and carriers, the practical implication is that claims readiness should begin before loading and continue through delivery. A defensible file still depends on contemporaneous evidence: pre-loading condition records, packing and securing checks, reservations where defects or wetting are observed, verified cargo and container information, custody handovers, temperature or voyage records where relevant, and prompt independent survey instructions after an incident. These controls are not merely administrative. They help distinguish pre-existing damage, packing or stowage deficiencies, handling damage, transit damage and post-discharge deterioration—issues that can determine both recovery prospects and the ability to prevent recurrence.

IUMI specifically noted continuing work on wood packaging material used in cargo transport. Its September guidance says non-compliance with ISPM 15 commonly causes detention, fumigation, repacking, return or other disruption even where the insured goods are undamaged. That is a useful reminder that a material cargo loss may arise from delay, mitigation expense and supply-chain interruption rather than physical damage alone.

Why this matters: the development reinforces a practical claims lesson for shipowners, charterers, cargo owners, insurers and surveyors. The strongest loss-prevention intervention is often the first controllable decision: whether to accept questionable cargo or packaging, stop or qualify loading, document an exception, preserve samples and records, or appoint a surveyor early. Treating those steps as part of risk selection and operational control—not paperwork created only after a dispute—should improve both claim defensibility and the quality of corrective action.