Insurance; public insurance adjusters; total commission payable; limit; One Hundred Thousand Dollars; effective date.
Summary
HB4228 amends Oklahoma’s public insurance adjuster law to cap the total compensation payable to a public insurance adjuster, including expenses, direct costs, and other accrued costs, when the adjuster is handling claims for entities covered by the Governmental Tort Claims Act. Under the bill, the adjuster’s total commission would be limited to the lesser of 10% of the insurance settlement or $100,000. The measure updates Section 6224 of Title 36 and would take effect November 1, 2026.
The bill is narrowly focused on insurance claim handling for governmental entities and does not broadly change public insurance adjuster rules outside that context. It would directly affect public insurance adjusters, insurers, and public bodies or other entities subject to the Governmental Tort Claims Act by limiting the amount that can be charged from settlement proceeds in these cases.
Impact
HB4228 would amend Oklahoma insurance law by revising the compensation cap for public insurance adjusters in claims involving entities covered by the Governmental Tort Claims Act. It would replace the current cap structure with a stricter ceiling of 10% or $100,000, whichever is less, and would expressly include expenses and other costs within that limit. The bill would therefore constrain adjuster fees in governmental claims and could reduce settlement-related costs for public entities and their insurers.
Sentiment
No committee transcript or recorded vote information is available, so there is no documented debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be a targeted cost-limiting reform rather than a broad policy change, suggesting a likely administrative or fiscal rationale. The available legislative history shows the bill was referred to Rules as of February 9, 2026.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the fee cap itself: public insurance adjusters may view the 10% or $100,000 limit as too restrictive, especially in complex or high-value governmental claims where costs and effort can be substantial. On the other hand, governmental entities and those favoring tighter oversight of claim-related expenses may support the cap as a way to control settlement costs and prevent excessive compensation. Because there are no transcripts, no specific arguments from legislators or stakeholders are recorded in the provided materials.