Tim owns a small landscaping company = Tim’s Trees & Shrubs….

Tim owns a small landscaping company = Tim’s Trees & Shrubs. When a customer requests landscaping services, Tim sends his employees out in a company truck that is pulling a trailer that houses all of the landscaping tools, equipment, and machinery. Tim’s employees are very diligent, but maybe one or two times a year, an employee will be careless while backing the trailer into a customer’s yard and accidently damage the customer’s grass or other small shrubbery. Tim knows these are simply accidents: since they do not happen very often and usually only cost around $200-$300 to replace the damaged property. During the one or two times this occurs per year: Tim’s Trees & Shrubs will simply pay for the damage caused to customer’s property out of the company’s business bank account.  Which method of risk financing is Tim’s Trees & Shrubs practicing?  

There are several advantages if a firm chooses to engage in…

There are several advantages if a firm chooses to engage in self-insured retention as opposed to engaging in a risk transfer (i.e. purchase insurance)  All of the following are advantages of self-insured retention as a risk financing technique – EXCEPT:   

One of the main disadvantages of self-insured retention as a…

One of the main disadvantages of self-insured retention as a risk financing technique is the possibility of sustaining a “catastrophic loss” > which the firm will be responsible for paying if they choose to engage in retention.  What is the key reason that the possibility of a catastrophic loss makes engaging in self-insured retention difficult, if not impossible?