ORDERS:
ORDER AND DECISION
This matter comes before me upon the request of Investors Title Insurance Company ("Investors
Title") for approval of its request for an overall +0.16 percent increase in title insurance premium
rates. A hearing was held before me on April 23, 1996, resulting in the following findings of fact
and conclusions of law.
FINDINGS OF FACT
I make the following findings of fact based upon the evidence presented, taking into consideration
the burden on the Petitioner to establish its case by a preponderance of the evidence and based
upon the credibility of the witnesses:
1. As evidenced by the filing materials and exhibits, Investors Title seeks to amend its current
rates to allow for a charge of $25.00 for simultaneous issuance of an owner's policy and
mortgagee's policy of title insurance and to allow for a maximum charge of $50.00, rather than
the current charge of $15.00, for the issuance of an interim title insurance binder/commitment in
advance of closing. Such charges are consistent with prevailing charges within the title insurance
industry. The combined net effect of both changes produces an estimated overall +0.16 percent
increase in premium level.
2. Investors Title's last increase in rates for this line and type of insurance was effective February
7, 1991. Written premiums in South Carolina for calendar year 1994, the most recent available
calendar year, was $2,467,470.
3. The South Carolina Department of Insurance does not oppose the approval of the requested
increase by Investors Title. Martin Simons, the Department's Deputy Director and Chief Casualty
Actuary, testified that approval of the filing would produce rates which are not excessive,
inadequate or unfairly discriminatory and in keeping with all statutory standards for such rates.
4. Notice of this hearing was published in five (5) newspapers of statewide circulation more than
thirty (30) days in advance of the hearing. No member of the public responded to the notices or
appeared at the hearing.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. The Administrative Law Division has jurisdiction of this matter by virtue of S.C. Code Ann. §§
38-73-910 and 1-23-600(B) (Cum. Supp. 1995).
2. Due and proper notice of this hearing was given in accordance with the requirements of S.C.
Code Ann. §38-73-910 (Cum. Supp. 1995).
3. The burden of proof imposed upon Investors Title in this hearing requires it to establish, by the
preponderance of the evidence, that the title insurance rate revisions, if approved, would result in
rates which are not excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory. S.C. Code Ann.
§38-73-10(a)(1) (Cum. Supp. 1995). Based upon the evidence and testimony presented at the
hearing, that burden has been met and approval of the requested increase would produce rates
which are neither excessive, inadequate nor unfairly discriminatory.
4. More than twelve (12) months has elapsed since the effective date of Investors Title's last
increase for this line and type of insurance and no reason exists why approval of the filing cannot
become effective immediately upon the entry of this Order.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the filing request
for a +0.16 percent increase in overall title insurance premiums by Investors Title Insurance
Company should be, and hereby is, approved as filed, effective upon execution and entry of this
Order.
___________________________
ALISON RENEE LEE
Administrative Law Judge
April ____, 1996
Columbia, South Carolina |