California Codes

Cal. Insurance Code § 12414.13 (2026)

Hearings, Procedure, and Judicial Review

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person aggrieved by any rate charged, rating plan or rating system followed or adopted by a title insurer, underwritten title company, or controlled escrow company may request such person or entity to review the manner in which the rate, plan, system, or rule has been applied with respect to insurance or services afforded him. Such request may be made by his authorized representative, and shall be written. If the request is not granted within 30 days after it is made, the requestor may treat it as rejected. Any person aggrieved by the action of any such person or entity in refusing the review requested, or in failing or refusing to grant all or part of the relief requested, may file a written complaint and request for hearing with the commissioner, specifying the grounds relied upon. If the commissioner has information concerning a similar complaint he may deny the hearing. If he believes that probable cause for the complaint does not exist or that the complaint is not made in good faith he shall deny the hearing. Otherwise, and if he finds that the complaint charges a violation of Article 5.5 (commencing with Section 12401) and that the complainant would be aggrieved if the violation is proved, he shall proceed as provided in Section 12414.14.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2021–2022 · leading case: Villanueva v. Fid. Nat'l Title Co. (Cal. 2021).
Villanueva v. Fid. Nat'l Title Co. (Cal. 2021). · cites it 3× “7 (Ins. Code, §§ 12414.13–12414.19) of the title insurance chapter.”
Sjobring v. First Am. Title Ins. Co. CA2/3 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022). “7 (Ins. Code, §§ 12414.13–12414.19) of the chapter covering title insurance provides for administrative proceedings before the Commissioner in the event of disputes over charged rates or rating plans or systems.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.