Login
Mission Statement

Dedicated to providing regular (well, as regular as our workload permits) updates concerning legal and regulatory events impacting the regulation of the business of insurance in the State of California.

No Attorney-Client Relationship or Legal Advice

This journal is for general informational purposes only.  By using this journal, you agree that the information herein does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and any of the authors or guest contributors of this journal and/or Barger & Wolen LLP.  This journal should not be considered a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified attorney licensed in your state. The information herein may be changed without notice and is not guaranteed to be complete, correct or up-to-date. The opinions expressed throughout this journal are the opinions of the individual author and/or contributor and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of any other author, contributor or any attorney of Barger & Wolen LLP.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT

Search
Prior Approval
« Insurance Caselaw Roundup (1/29/09) | Main | Insurance Caselaw Roundup (1/17/09) »
Thursday
Jan222009

Commissioner Adopts ALJ Ruling Approving 15.28% Rate Increase for Fireman's Fund's EQ

The Commissioner adopted Administrative Law Judge Inama’s 65-page proposed decision granting Fireman’s Fund a 15.28% rate increase (In the Matter of the Rate Application of American Automobile Insurance Company et. al., File No. PA-2007-00019).  A copy of that order is attached here.

The central issues in the rate hearing involved justification of the RMS model, accounting for the cost of reinsurance, calculation of DCCE, and the use of demand surge. To a much lesser extent, the hearing involved variance requests. The decision contains a number of important findings and is helpful in providing guidance on what proof must be presented to support a rate request.

It also provides guidance on what not to do, as Consumer Watchdog’s (formerly FTCR) expert, Allan Schwartz, found out. For Judge Inama, with respect to evidence provided in connection with one particular issue, he noted that "Mr. Schwartz's testimony on behalf of FTCR causes serious concern" and is "troubling in its contradictions and reliance on speculative and irrelevant material."  Regarding the same,  Judge Inama even remarked that the "testimony is, at least careless and may be dodgier than that."

[Disclosure: Our office (Steve Weinstein, Esq., Richard Dela Mora, Esq., and Spencer Y. Kook, Esq.) represented Fireman's Fund in this hearing.]