ILCS » Chapter 215 · Act 5
Illinois Compiled Statutes

215 ILCS 5/522 (2026)

Purpose

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(215 ILCS 5/522) (from Ch. 73, par. 1065.69)
    Sec. 522. Purpose. This article is to make basic property insurance increasingly available to the citizens of this State, and to deter the insurance industry from geographically redlining urban areas of this State by requiring the restructuring of the Industry Placement Facility and administering the FAIR Plan (Fair Access to Insurance Requirements) to deliver residential property insurance to all citizens of this State on a reasonable access and marketing basis by offering homeowners insurance, by requiring immediate binding of eligible risks, by making use of premium installment payment plans, and by further establishing reasonable service standards in its plan of operation subject to the approval and review of the Director; and, to establish a central operation facility for the equitable distribution of losses and expenses in the writing of the basic property insurance and homeowners insurance in this State.
(Source: P.A. 80-1365.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2006–2006 · leading case: Sieron & Assocs., Inc. v. Dep't of Ins., 857 N.E.2d 805 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Sieron & Assocs., Inc. v. Dep't of Ins., 857 N.E.2d 805 (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 8× “The Sierons now appeal, arguing that the FAIR Plan Association's decision not to renew their insurance policies violates the Illinois FAIR Plan (see 215 ILCS 5/522 et seq. (West 2004)), is against the manifest weight of the evidence, is constitutionally invalid, and is contrary…”
Sieron & Assocs., Inc. v. Dep't of Ins. (Ill. App. Ct. 2006). · cites it 3× “The Sierons now appeal, arguing that the FAIR Plan Association's decision not to renew their insurance policies violates the Illinois FAIR Plan (see 215 ILCS 5/522 et seq. (West 2004)), is against the manifest weight of the evidence, is constitutionally invalid, and is contrary…”
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.