ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
On September 13, 1994, the TIG Countrywide Insurance Company filed an application with the
Chief Insurance Commissioner requesting approval of an overall rate increase of 15% in their
Mobilowners Policy rates.
By appropriate notice dated September 27, 1994, the public was advised that an application had
been made and that a hearing would be held on January 23, 1995.
Prior to the hearing the parties reached an agreement regarding a rate increase that would not be
protested by the South Carolina Department of Insurance and would meet the statutory
requirements.
The hearing was held before me on the above referenced matter on January 23, 1995. Present at
the hearing were TIG Countrywide Insurance Company representing James Fortney, Martin M.
Simons, Chief Casualty Actuary, with the South Carolina Department of Insurance and Nancy
Vaughn Coombs, Deputy Consumer Advocate for the South Carolina Department of Consumer
Affairs.
From testimony, exhibits and arguments presented at the hearing, I make the following:
FINDINGS OF FACTS
1, The Company originally requested an overall rate increase of 15% in its Mobilowners Policy
property and casualty insurance rates.
2. After reviewing the Company's original support data, the South Carolina Department of
Insurance Chief Casualty Actuary and Acting Consumer Advocate for the State of South Carolina
questioned some of the rating methodology.
3. Additional information was provided to the Departments of Insurance and Consumer Affairs
and discussions ensued.
4. The proposed increase of 15% appears to be justified and State of South Carolina Department
of Insurance recommends its approval and the Department of Consumer Affairs does not object to
it.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The law governing the making of rates is well defined. Insurance rates are regulated under Title
38 of the South Carolina Code of Laws, 1976, as amended. The pertinent statutory requirement
is that rates shall be neither excessive, inadequate nor unfairly discriminatory, and shall include a
reasonable margin for underwriting profit. S.C. Code of Laws § 38-73-330 (Supp. 1993). The
filing must meet both the statutory standards and be supported by a preponderance of evidence.
An independent investigation was made of the proposed filing. All conclusions were based upon
the documents supporting the filing by the Company, the testimony adduced at the hearing and
matters officially noted during the course of the hearing. I have resolved all factual questions on
the basis of the exhibits and testimony in the record and on the basis of the independent analysis of
the rate filing formulated by the State of South Carolina Department of Insurance and Department
of Consumer Affairs.
The proposal of the rate increase for a revision in Mobilowners Policy rates would produce rates
which would not be excessive, inadequate nor unfairly discriminatory and would be in compliance
with South Carolina Ann. Section 38-73-330.
ORDER
It is therefore, ORDERED that the proposed rates be approved. The effective date of the
proposed rates must not occur before March 1, 1995.
__________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
February _____, 1995
Columbia, South Carolina. |
