Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 737.505 (2026)

Insured entitled to rate information; remedies of aggrieved persons

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      737.505 Insured entitled to rate information; remedies of aggrieved persons. (1) Every rating organization and every insurer which makes its own rates, within a reasonable time after receiving written request therefor and upon payment of such reasonable charge as it may make, shall furnish to any insured affected by a rate made by it, or to the authorized representative of such insured, all pertinent information as to such rate.

      (2) Every rating organization and every insurer which makes its own rates shall provide within this state reasonable means whereby any person aggrieved by the application of its rating system may be heard, in person or by the authorized representative, on written request by the person or authorized representative to review the manner in which such rating system has been applied in connection with the insurance afforded the person. If the rating organization or insurer fails to grant or reject such request within 30 days after it is made, the applicant may proceed in the same manner as if the application had been rejected.

      (3) Any party affected by the action of such rating organization or such insurer on such request, within 30 days after written notice of such action, may appeal to the Director of the Department of Consumer and Business Services, who, after a hearing held at a place designated by the director upon not less than 10 days’ written notice to the appellant and to such rating organization or insurer, shall affirm or reverse such action.

      (4) Appeals to the director pursuant to ORS 737.318 with regard to a final premium audit billing must be made within 60 days after receipt of the billing.

      (5) The director may, upon a showing of good cause, stay any workers’ compensation insurer’s collection effort on a final premium audit billing during the pendency of an appeal authorized by subsection (4) of this section. [Amended by 1967 c.359 §327; 1987 c.884 §6]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases, 1989–2014 · leading case: Boone v. Wright, 822 P.2d 719 (Or. Ct. App. 1991).
Boone v. Wright, 822 P.2d 719 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “At the same *723 time that it adopted the new limitation, the legislature also amended ORS 737.318(4): "Notwithstanding ORS 737.”
Salem Decorating Ctr., Inc. v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 840 P.2d 739 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× ““ (3) The premium audit system shall include provisions for: *169 ‘ ‘ (a) Employer education of the audit reporting function of the rating system; “(b) A continuous test audit program providing for auditing of all insurers; “(d) An appeal process pursuant to ORS 737.505 for…”
Kilham Stationery & Printing v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 820 P.2d 842 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 12× ““ (3) The premium audit system shall include provisions for: * * * * “(d) An appeal process pursuant to ORS 737.505 for employers to question the results of a premium audit; * * * "(e) * * * * * “(4) Notwithstanding ORS 737.”
Reforestation Gen. Contractors, Inc. v. Filings of the Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 872 P.2d 423 (Or. Ct. App. 1994). “During the period in dispute, Johnson filed two injury claims for separate injuries that he sustained while doing field work.”
Little Donkey Enter., Inc. v. State Accident Ins. Fund, 845 P.2d 1298 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 3× “1 ORS 737.505 provides, in part: “(1) Every rating organization and every insurer which makes its own rates, within a reasonable time after receiving written request therefor and upon payment of such reasonable charge as it may make, shall furnish to any insured affected by a…”
TTC - the Trading Co. v. Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs., 234 P.3d 1056 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “318(3)(d); ORS 737.505(4); OAR 836-043-0170(1). At the hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ), employer’s president described the manufacturing operations, but employer did not introduce any expert testimony on the classification of those operations.”
Bruer's Contract Cutting v. Nat'l Council On Comp. Ins., 841 P.2d 690 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “235; “(d) An appeal process pursuant to ORS 737.505 for employees to question the results of a premium audit; and “(e) Civil penalties pursuant to ORS 731.”
R & R Tree Serv., Inc. v. SAIF Corp., 286 P.3d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “318; ORS 737.505(4); OAR 836-043-0170(1). We affirm.”
Pease v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 830 P.2d 605 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “ORS 737.505(4) provides: “Appeals to the director pursuant to ORS 737.”
Mr. Lustre Car Care Ctr. v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 783 P.2d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “To ensure that an employer has been classified correctly, ORS 737.505(2) provides that each rating organization “shall provide within this state a reasonable means whereby any person aggrieved by the application of its rating system may be heard * * * to review the manner in…”
Douglas Cnty. Farmer's Co-Op v. Filings of the Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 849 P.2d 1144 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “Petitioner then requested review of the classification with DIF pursuant to ORS 737.505. DIF also affirmed the classification.”
Cobra Constr. v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 812 P.2d 19 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 7× “Subsection 4 was added to ORS 737.505 in 1987. Or Laws 1987, ch 884, § 6; see also ORS 737.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 737.505(2) — 1 case
Mr. Lustre Car Care Ctr. v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 783 P.2d 1032 (Or. Ct. App. 1989). “To ensure that an employer has been classified correctly, ORS 737.505(2) provides that each rating organization “shall provide within this state a reasonable means whereby any person aggrieved by the application of its rating system may be heard * * * to review the manner in…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 737.505(3) — 2 cases
Little Donkey Enter., Inc. v. State Accident Ins. Fund, 845 P.2d 1298 (Or. Ct. App. 1993). “1 ORS 737.505 provides, in part: “(1) Every rating organization and every insurer which makes its own rates, within a reasonable time after receiving written request therefor and upon payment of such reasonable charge as it may make, shall furnish to any insured affected by a…”
Pease v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 876 P.2d 839 (Or. Ct. App. 1994).
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 737.505(4) — 7 cases
Salem Decorating Ctr., Inc. v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 840 P.2d 739 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). ““ (3) The premium audit system shall include provisions for: *169 ‘ ‘ (a) Employer education of the audit reporting function of the rating system; “(b) A continuous test audit program providing for auditing of all insurers; “(d) An appeal process pursuant to ORS 737.505 for…”
Kilham Stationery & Printing v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 820 P.2d 842 (Or. Ct. App. 1991). ““ (3) The premium audit system shall include provisions for: * * * * “(d) An appeal process pursuant to ORS 737.505 for employers to question the results of a premium audit; * * * "(e) * * * * * “(4) Notwithstanding ORS 737.”
TTC - the Trading Co. v. Dep't of Consum. & Bus. Servs., 234 P.3d 1056 (Or. Ct. App. 2010). “318(3)(d); ORS 737.505(4); OAR 836-043-0170(1). At the hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ), employer’s president described the manufacturing operations, but employer did not introduce any expert testimony on the classification of those operations.”
R & R Tree Serv., Inc. v. SAIF Corp., 286 P.3d 1232 (Or. Ct. App. 2012). “318; ORS 737.505(4); OAR 836-043-0170(1). We affirm.”
Pease v. Nat'l Council on Comp. Ins., 830 P.2d 605 (Or. Ct. App. 1992). “ORS 737.505(4) provides: “Appeals to the director pursuant to ORS 737.”
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.