However, the Legislature failed to pass legislation preventing implementation of the rules.
Iobserve rating and michigan code#
Granholm a notice of objection to the proposed rules on February 17, 2005, stating that the “Committee has affirmatively determined by a concurrent majority vote that” (1) the agency is exceeding the statutory scope of its rulemaking authority, (2) the rules are in conflict with the Insurance Code of 1956, and (3) the rules are arbitrary and capricious. The Michigan Legislature's Joint ommittee on Administrative Rules sent Governor Jennifer M. Defendant formally adopted the rules on January 18, 2005. The ORR certified that the proposed rules were legal on January 4, 2005. On October 1, 2004, after the four public hearings, defendant submitted the proposed rules to the Office of Regulatory Reform (ORR) 2 along with the OFIS report. A number of insurance industry representatives testified at the hearings or submitted written documentation. Defendant held four public hearings in July 2004 418 persons attended and more than 800 persons submitted written comment (an unprecedented number in the OFIS's history, according to defendant). Fitzgerald, had addressed the issue by conducting a review of insurance scoring and issuing a bulletin on February 14, 2003, “directing insurers to take eight specific actions to comply with the above statutes if they chose to continue using insurance credit scoring.”Īs a result of an increase in consumer complaints, defendant conducted another review of insurance scoring, and ultimately decided to address the practice by proposing administrative rules. 1 Defendant's predecessor, Commissioner Frank M. Because Judge Kelly concludes that the circuit court erred in permitting plaintiffs to maintain an original action and would vacate the circuit court's order on that basis, and I conclude that the circuit court erred in failing to base its review on the administrative record, and in accepting additional evidence, and further erred in its conclusions on the merits, at least with regard to insurance issued under chapter 21 of the Insurance Code, this Court vacates the circuit court's order granting a permanent injunction and declaring defendant's rules illegal, unenforceable, and void, and lifts the stay imposed on defendant commissioner's enforcement of the rules.Ī significant issue facing defendant commissioner when she assumed office in April 2003 was the use by insurance companies of credit report scores in setting policyholder rates (referred to as “insurance scoring”). The members of this panel have come to different conclusions regarding the issues presented, and have written three separate opinions. The circuit court declared certain administrative rules (rules) promulgated by defendant commissioner illegal, invalid, and unenforceable, and permanently enjoined defendant from enforcing the rules against any plaintiff or intervening plaintiff in the action.
In this action for a declaratory judgment, defendant Commissioner of the Office of Financial and Insurance Services (OFIS), appeals as of right the circuit court's opinion and order granting a permanent injunction to plaintiffs and intervening plaintiffs. June), Ypsilanti, for amici curiae the Michigan House Democratic Caucus. Haney), and Law Offices of Robert June, P.C. Pierson), Lansing, for amici curiae the Michigan Association of Home Builders. Chenoweth, Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant. Eric Restuccia, Solicitor General, and William A. Gallinger), Lansing, for the intervening plaintiffs. Lanstra, Jr.), Lansing, for the plaintiffs. Decided: August 21, 2008īefore: WHITE, P.J., and ZAHRA and KIRSTEN FRANK KELLY, JJ.ĭickinson Wright P.L.L.C.
COMMISSIONER OF THE OFFICE OF FINANCIAL AND INSURANCE SERVICES.
0 kommentar(er)
