Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Premium Change Notice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RAC reviews draft premium-change notice under newly adopted statute
Summary
Regulators and stakeholders met to refine a draft rule requiring carriers to provide renewal notices that let consumers request explanations for premium increases. Discussion centered on what counts as a "significant" factor, how insurers should respond to consumer inquiries, agent involvement, and data reporting timelines.
John, filling in to lead the process, opened a recorded Regulatory Advisory Committee meeting to review draft rules implementing a recently adopted statute requiring carriers to give consumers the right to request explanations for premium increases at renewal. Jesse O'Brien, a policy manager with the division, and staff walked participants through the mock premium-change notice and related reporting provisions.
Stakeholders focused on how the draft defines a factor that "significantly contributes" to a premium increase and what the notice should show. John described sample causes—claims, thefts, wildfire exposure—and said the draft limits listed items to the top four factors. "If less than four factors significantly contributed, only list the 1, 2, or 3 factors as appropriate," John said while showing the template. Brandon Vic raised concern that the draft's earlier 2% threshold may be too low and said his group prefers something closer to the 10% figure included in an earlier bill version.
Consumer advocates pressed for clearer language about what happens if the premium change was caused by an error and for written confirmation to consumers when an insurer determines an error occurred. "I just think something in here needs to say that a consumer still gets a response in writing, indicating, if after the investigation... there was an error," Michelle Drews of the Oregon Consumer League said.
Participants also discussed whether agents/producers should be looped in when consumers inquire. TJ suggested agents be cc'd because they are often the first line to explain a rate change; John agreed producers are commonly involved and said insurers may adopt different intake channels (apps, call centers, email) subject to department approval.
On data reporting the draft raises the reporting threshold for covered insurers to $1,000,000 in premium and delays the first required submission to 2028, with proposed biennial reporting (2028, 2030, 2032) to allow more meaningful data collection. Jesse said staff is seeking two related data points: the number of policyholders who requested explanations and characteristics of the premium increases those policyholders experienced.
The committee asked members to submit written suggestions within about a week so staff can incorporate changes before a likely final RAC meeting; Jesse noted Scott Lemke will be on medical leave and John will lead the rule drafting in his absence. The draft and public comment letters are posted on the rulemaking web page, staff said. The group is planning one more RAC meeting before proposing formal rules and the SNFI (statement of need and fiscal impact) discussion.
