O.C.G.A. § 33-24-12 (2019)
Noncomplying conditions or provisions; cancellation of contracts covering uninsurable subjects
(a) Any insurance policy, rider, or endorsement issued and otherwise valid which contains any condition or provision not in compliance with the requirements of this title shall not be rendered invalid due to the noncomplying condition or provision but shall be construed and applied in accordance with such conditions and provisions as would have
applied had the policy, rider, or endorsement been in full compliance with this title. (b) Any insurance contract delivered or issued for delivery in this state covering a subject or subjects of insurance resident, located or to be performed in this state and which, pursuant to this title, the insurer may not lawfully insure under the contract shall be cancelable at any time by the insurer, any provisions of the contract to the contrary notwithstanding; and the insurer shall promptly cancel the contract in accordance with the Commissioner’s request for cancellation. No illegality or cancellation shall be deemed to relieve the insurer of any liability incurred by it under the contract while in force or to prohibit the insurer from retaining the pro rata earned premium on the contract. This Code section shall not relieve the insurer from any penalty otherwise incurred by the insurer under this title on account of any violation.
History
Code 1933, § 56-2418, enacted by Ga. L. 1960, p. 289, § 1; Ga. L. 2005, p. 60, § 33/HB 95; Ga. L. 2019, p. 386, § 29/SB 133.
The 2019 amendment, effective July 1, 2019, deleted ‘‘after January 1, 1961,’’ following ‘‘endorsement issued’’ near the beginning of subsection (a).
Annotations
JUDICIAL DECISIONS Grafting of statutory law into noncomplying policy. - When an insurer issues a policy with provisions not in compliance with the law, the contract will not be rendered void but the provisions of the statute will be grafted into the policy. Flewellen v. Atlanta Cas. Co., 250 Ga. 709, 300 S.E.2d 673 (1983). No genuine issue of material fact as to uninsured motorist coverage. - Trial court erred by granting summary judgment to the insurer because the undisputed evidence did not show that the insured made an affirmative choice for less uninsured/underinsured coverage than the statutory default amount set forth in O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11(a)(1)(B); thus, the statutory default amount of coverage applied to the policy, and the trial court erred in construing the policy to provide a lesser amount of coverage. McGraw v. IDS Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 323 Ga. App. 408, 744 S.E.2d 891 (2013).
Failure to send required notice. - Standard form homeowners insurance policies covered diminished value when loss was not otherwise defined and an endorsement providing that loss did not include diminution in value was ineffective as to renewal policies absent a notice informing policyholders that coverage for diminished value was not renewed. The failure to send the notice was not excusable under O.C.G.A. § 33-24-12 or under case law addressing mere technical violations. Thompson v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 264 F. Supp. 3d 1302 (M.D. Ga. 2017). Cited in Pearce v. Southern Guar. Ins. Co., 246 Ga. 33, 268 S.E.2d 623 (1980); Penn Am. Ins. Co. v. Miller, 228 Ga. App. 659, 492 S.E.2d 571 (1997); Ga. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co. v. Rockefeller, 343 Ga. App. 36, 805 S.E.2d 660 (2017).
RESEARCH REFERENCES Am. Jur. 2d. - 43 Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance, §§ 238 et seq., 259 et seq.
ALR. - What constitutes ‘‘other insurance’’ within meaning of insurance policy
provisions prohibiting insured from obtaining other insurance on same property, 7 A.L.R.4th 494.