Leon FL Administrative law and Insurance Lawyers | Robert Wa -- eLawyers

04-001540RP AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL SOUTH INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2004)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 22, 2004

Whether proposed Rule 69O-170.013(7), Florida Administrative Code, involving insurance coverage by property and casualty insurers under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, meets all procedural and substantive requirements so as to be a valid exercise of delegated legislative authority.Proposed Rule 690-17O.013(7), Florida Administrative Code, is invalid pursuant to Sections 120.52(8)(a), 120.52(8)(b), 120.52(8)(d), and 120.52(8)(e), Florida Statutes.

04-000155 AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BIRMINGHAM FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2004)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 14, 2004

The issues are as follows: (a) whether Respondent's disapproval of Petitioners' terrorism rates for workers' compensation insurance (workers' comp) under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, Public Law 101-297, 116 U.S.C. Section 2322 (TRIA) is based on an invalid agency statement of general applicability, which has not been adopted as a rule pursuant to Section 120.54, Florida Statutes (2003); (b) whether Petitioners, as members or subscribers of the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) were required to comply with Section 627.211, Florida Statutes (2003), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 69O-189.004; and (c) whether Petitioners' terrorism rate filing for the workers' comp line of business results in rates that are excessive or unfairly discriminatory.Petitioners did not meet their burden of proof that their terrorism rate was not excessive or unfairly discriminatory.

04-000163 AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BIRMINGHAM FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2004)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 14, 2004

The issues are as follows: (a) whether Respondent's disapproval of Petitioners' terrorism rates for workers' compensation insurance (workers' comp) under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, Public Law 101-297, 116 U.S.C. Section 2322 (TRIA) is based on an invalid agency statement of general applicability, which has not been adopted as a rule pursuant to Section 120.54, Florida Statutes (2003); (b) whether Petitioners, as members or subscribers of the National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) were required to comply with Section 627.211, Florida Statutes (2003), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 69O-189.004; and (c) whether Petitioners' terrorism rate filing for the workers' comp line of business results in rates that are excessive or unfairly discriminatory.Petitioners did not meet their burden of proof that their terrorism rate was not excessive or unfairly discriminatory.

03-004477 AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BIRMINGHAM FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2003)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 26, 2003

Whether Respondent's proposed disapproval of Petitioners' burglary-theft rate filing (OIR File No. 03-11518) for insurance coverage under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002, is based on an invalid agency statement of general applicability which has not been adopted as a rule pursuant to Section 120.54, Florida Statutes. Whether Petitioners' burglary-theft rate filing (OIR File No. 03-11518) for insurance coverage under the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 meets all procedural and substantive requirements so as to be approved.Respondent`s non-rule policy, by which it rejected terrorism rate filing (TRIA), was invalid, but the insurer was unable to prove-up the requested rate per statute.

Robert Wayne Pass

04-001540RP AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL SOUTH INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2004)

04-000155 AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BIRMINGHAM FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2004)

04-000163 AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BIRMINGHAM FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2004)

03-004477 AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY, BIRMINGHAM FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA, COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY INSURANCE COMPANY, GRANITE STATE INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. vs DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2003)

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Search for lawyers by practice areas.