Can't understand why your car insurance went up? That may change
On Tuesday, he set out to require it.
Kreidler proposed a new regulation requiring greater transparency of specific factors driving up the cost of a premium.
Specifically, it says insurers must "provide sufficient information, in terms that are understandable to an average policyholder, which enable the policyholder to figure out the basic nature of any premium increase."
Kreidler said in a statement it is "pretty basic information you should expect from your insurance company, but we hear from hundreds of consumers every year who cannot get a straight answer on why they're being charged more."
Under the proposed rule, starting
After
The rule would apply to all property and casualty insurers in the state that sell private passenger auto and homeowner coverage, including coverage for manufactured homes, condominiums and renters. Insurers of health, disability, life, and long-term care would be exempt.
Kreidler launched this rule-making effort in
The initial filing states the lack of transparency "prevents the insurance consumer from making informed decisions on their insurance policies, renewals, coverages, and pricing. Allowing insurers to make rate changes or to take adverse actions against consumers who are at a significant disadvantage in these dealings, where there is also lack of full disclosure, complete transparency, and fairness, results in unfair and deceptive trade practices."
Commission staff conducted five meetings with interested parties on the proposal, the most recent occurred last month.
Several factors are used to calculate an auto or homeowner insurance rating. These include a driving record, miles driven, number of drivers, claims history, discounts, fees and surcharges, the driver's age, credit history, education, gender, marital status, occupation, property age, and value.
Commission staff learned some insurers' rating formulas have become so complex, they couldn't readily specify the reasons behind someone's premium change. Some insurers' computer systems are unable to generate a clear answer, staff noted.
Insurers said they want to ensure customers understand what's going on, but the proposed mandate could make the process more complicated, they argued.
"Our concern from the outset with the premium change transparency rule is that it would end up requiring policyholders to wade through massive explanatory documents filled with equations and formulas better suited to insurance actuaries and regulators – rendering the information useless to consumers, at the potential cost of hundreds of millions of dollars to insurers," said
The association, he said, prefers a national approach as it is very difficult for national carriers to comply with complex disclosure requirements now under discussion in different states.
"Regulation for regulation's sake is not consumer protection," Collins said.
A public hearing is set for


HCI Group Sets 2023 Annual Shareholders Meeting and Record Date
MetLife Investment Management Achieves 40% Growth in Total Agricultural Mortgage Loan Assets Under Management Over Five-year Period
Advisor News
- Your client’s $3 million portfolio doesn’t tell you their insurance needs
- How life insurance can provide liquidity for wealthy families
- Retirement providers turn to digital engagement to retain assets
- Looking out for clients with diminished mental capacity
- House panel advances CLEAR Forms Act backed by IRI
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- AM Best downgrades A-Cap insurers amid financial and regulatory troubles
- Lawsuit claims Delaware Life hid billions in insurer-linked investments
- AM Best to Deliver Presentation at 2026 ACLI Annual Conference
- Global Atlantic Announces Launch of ForeLifetime Income, a New Fixed Index Annuity
- A-Cap strikes back with lawsuit accusing SC regulators of sloppy process, leaking secrets
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News