When it comes regulatory infighting between the insurance community and policymakers, the general rule is that when in doubt, declare victory. For once, however, the industry seems justified in taking a victory lap after an administrative law judge ruled that the Office of Insurance Regulation's rule on the use of credit reports is invalid.

The judge's ruling largely centered on the fact that the rule doesn't define what constitutes “unfair discrimination” nor how to determine whether a class of individuals suffered a “disparate impact” by the use of credit reports with respect to race, martial status, age, and other factors. As stated by Administrative Law Judge Lawrence P. Stevenson, “The proposed rule's definitional failures would grant (the Office of Insurance Regulation) unchecked authority to reject rate filings as 'unfairly discriminatory,' in derogation of the state's provision that the (Financial Services Commission) adopt 'standards.'”

“We won. What a way to start the New Year,” said Guy Marvin, president of the Florida Insurance Council. “The rule would have effectively eliminated the use of credit information, a proven risk assessment tool that benefits countless insurance consumers.”

Recommended For You

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader

Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:

  • Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
  • Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
  • Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
  • Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.