Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation
Call Now: 904-383-7448The following standards shall apply to the making and use of rates pertaining to all classes of insurance to which this chapter is applicable:
(Code 1933, § 56-507, enacted by Ga. L. 1967, p. 684, § 1; Ga. L. 1978, p. 1423, § 1; Ga. L. 1978, p. 1936, § 1; Ga. L. 1980, p. 1011, § 2; Ga. L. 1982, p. 3, § 33; Ga. L. 1987, p. 911, § 1; Ga. L. 1988, p. 13, § 33; Ga. L. 1991, p. 1608, § 1.5; Ga. L. 1995, p. 1302, § 13; Ga. L. 2008, p. 1192, § 3/SB 276.)
- Pursuant to Code Section 28-9-5, in 1987, "country wide" was substituted for "country-wide" in paragraph (4).
- Ga. L. 1991, p. 1608, § 3.2, effective April 17, 1991, not codified by the General Assembly, provides: "(a) Each insurer shall file its proposed forms, manuals, underwriting rules, rates, and rating plans for coverages under motor vehicle insurance policies to be issued, issued for delivery, delivered, or renewed on and after October 1, 1991, with the Commissioner of Insurance for such examination and approval as is required by law. The Commissioner shall not approve such filings unless such filings contain optional medical payments coverage. Rates and rating plans for motor vehicle insurance coverages filed pursuant to this subsection shall reflect a reduction of the rates or rating plans for such coverages on file with the Commissioner as of January 28, 1991, of not less than 15 percent, as compared to rates in effect for coverages required to be offered by the former 'Georgia Motor Vehicle Accident Reparations Act,' with the exception of physical damage coverages, as specified in paragraph (3) of subsection (a) of former Code Section 33-34-5 and third-party property damage coverages. On October 1, 1991, the Commissioner shall reduce by 15 percent or such higher amount as he determines appropriate, after notice and hearing as required by law, any rate or rating plan for such coverages under motor vehicle insurance policies for which no filing has been received.
"(b) Any insurer aggrieved by the rate filing required pursuant to subsection (a) of this section may petition the Commissioner for a hearing to grant relief from the rate filing as the result of extraordinary circumstances. The insurer shall have the burden of proof to establish the extraordinary circumstances which justify relief. A hearing conducted pursuant to this subsection shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 2 of Title 33. Upon conclusion of any hearing conducted pursuant to this subsection, the Commissioner shall enter an order specifying the rates to be used by the insurer and shall indicate in his order all factors entering into a decision to relieve the insurer from full compliance with the provisions of subsection (a) of this section."
It makes no difference what process or method an insurance company follows in reaching its rate structure unless it violates the law in the particulars provided in this chapter. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- A failure to comply with any one of the three criteria of paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section in the making of a rate causes the rate to be illegal and offensive to this chapter. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- Paragraphs (1) through (8) of this section list different standards, for violation of any one of which the Commissioner may prohibit use of rates. Caldwell v. Insurance Co. of N. Am., 235 Ga. 141, 218 S.E.2d 754 (1975).
- The three statutory criteria of paragraphs (1) through (3) of this section must each be met in order for a challenged rate to withstand a possible prohibiting order of the Commissioner. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- The "reasonable degree of competition" provision in paragraph (2) of this section is intended to promote the establishment of premium rates at a reasonable level. Bentley v. Allstate Ins. Co., 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- The provision of paragraph (2) of this section prohibiting the Insurance Commissioner from disapproving a rate as excessive when a reasonable degree of competition exists is directed to the sufficiency of the competition to keep rates at a fair level. The question is not whether a particular insurer is competing nor whether there is some competition in the area, but whether the competition in the industry is vigorous enough to assure that rates are not excessive. Bentley v. Allstate Ins. Co., 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- To authorize the Commissioner's conclusion of law that an insurer's rates are excessive because a reasonable degree of competition does not exist in the area with respect to the classification to which the rates are applicable, the evidence must substantially support the principle that the insurer is not reasonably competitive with other companies collectively. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- Under paragraph (2) of this section, it is not necessary to first find that a reasonable degree of competition does not exist before a rate may be considered to be excessive because it is unreasonably high for the insurance provided. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- The fact that a particular insurance company's rate may be less than the rate for the majority of the companies does not require a conclusion that the rate is not excessive. Bentley v. Allstate Ins. Co., 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- The language of paragraph (4) of this section means the experiences of no one company but the combined experience of the entire industry shall be considered. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
Merely considering data before rejecting its import will not satisfy paragraph (4) of this section when it is plain that the factors being considered are quite significant, are generally recognized as such, may be expected to continue over a long period, and are capable of being figured in some manner into prospective loss experience. Caldwell v. Insurance Co. v. N. Am., 235 Ga. 141, 218 S.E.2d 754 (1975).
This section authorizes classifications of risks based upon a reduced expense factor. Caldwell v. Standard Nat'l Ins. Co., 229 Ga. 777, 194 S.E.2d 456 (1972).
The burden of proof is on the insurance company to show that its new rates are not subject to the criticism charged by the Commissioner and thus not offensive to the statute. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Bentley, 122 Ga. App. 738, 178 S.E.2d 700 (1970), modified, 227 Ga. 708, 182 S.E.2d 770 (1971).
- A filing which purports to offer insurance rates on a group basis does not violate § 33-6-5(4) when the rates are derived on the basis of rate-making considerations and standards set forth in this section. 1984 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 84-88.
Loss experience, expense factors, and income investment factors are legitimate rate-making considerations under this section. 1984 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 84-88.
- 43 Am. Jur. 2d, Insurance, § 38 et seq.
- 44 C.J.S., Insurance, § 93.
- Dividends on policies as violation of statutory prohibition of rebate, remission, refund, or other discrimination in respect to premiums, 137 A.L.R. 1029.
Recovery of damages as remedy for wrongful discrimination under state or local civil rights provisions, 85 A.L.R.3d 351.
Liability insurance: intoxication or other mental incapacity avoiding application of clause in liability policy specifically exempting coverage of injury or damage caused intentionally by or at direction of insured, 33 A.L.R.4th 983.
No results found for Georgia Code 33-9-4.