world leader in sophisticated computer modelling aimed at improving the evaluation of exposure and more accurately setting prices for their insureds.

But it has not necessarily brought uniformity to suggested rate structures proposed by leading reinsurers.

Even industry analysts who believe that there is great value in the computer modelling procedures, say this renewal season has shown some instances where companies proposed contrasting rates.

Reinsurers are using computer modelling techniques to try to better assess the exposure that they view the cover has to frequency and severity of a windstorm or earthquake. It had been suggested that through the use of computer models, the rating of risks by different reinsurers for the same programme would be closer together.

With all the reinsurers using the high-tech, sophisticated modelling programmes, it was expected that there would be more of a consensus of what the rate should be.

But that has not always been the case. Market sources say there have been examples where, in assessing the same risks, there have been wider swings in perceived rate to exposure as a result of the modelling, than it had been in the past when it was just individual judgement being used.

One example was a case, where among a handful of quotes from reinsurance companies, there was a 20 and 30 percent difference in the suggested rate.

The source said: "It was kind of surprising. I still think that there is a place for computer modelling. I'm not saying scrap it. In fact, I think that it is a better form of rating the cover, but it is not the end-all. It's an additional tool that can be used but there is an underwriting judgement factor of the individual that is required.'' "The indications from these models were quite varied and then the final rates were established between the clients and the leaders as a compromise. This could be a result of commercial judgement, competition or other market conditions.''