Transcript Highlights:

• It allows the insurers to collect the maintenance surcharges directly from policyholders.
• The appraisal clause protects both policyholders and insurance companies with transparency.
• Policyholders are simply trying to get their cars repaired correctly and safely.
• In those cases, policyholders are left with no other option but... ...hire a lawyer.
• Current law states that the insurer must issue a notice of non-renewal to the policyholder.

Bills: SB458, SB819, SB1238, SB1642, SB1643, SB1644, SB1791, SB1810, SB1824, SB1825, SB758, SB1455, SB1706

Keywords: insurance appraisal, property insurance, auto insurance, homeowners insurance, residential property, disputed loss, loss valuation, appraisal clause, appraiser, umpire, Texas Department of Insurance, TDI, insurance dispute resolution, claims adjustment, total loss, windstorm insurance, FAIR Plan, surplus lines insurance, policyholder, insurer

Bills: SB511, SB512, HB591, HB909, HB938, HB1154, HB1187

Keywords: automobile repairs, insurance transparency, repair shop liability, non-OEM parts, policyholder rights, automobile insurance, appraisal process, insurance policyholders, dispute resolution, claim valuation, family leave, insurance, paid leave, employment benefits, caregiver support, behavioral health, crisis services, mental health care, insurance coverage, healthcare access

Transcript Highlights:

• The appraisal made a big difference for auto policyholders, again, $5,300 on repair claims and $3,800
• I think for auto policyholders, because there are very few practical options for them on property damage

Bills: HB345, HB721, HB2580, SB815, HB3057, HB4603, HB3233, SB495, HB3863, HB3914, HB4570, HB5099, HB5173, SB458

Keywords: insurance, appraisal process, disputed losses, residential property, policyholder rights, insurer obligations, natural disasters, appraisal expenses, umpire selection, policyholder, insurer, umpire, claims management, health care, cost disclosure, benefit plan, administrators, traumatic brain injury, health benefit plans, insurance coverage

Transcript Highlights:

• bill that prohibits insurance companies from considering ESG criteria when setting rates for a policyholder

Bills: HB345, HB721, HB2580, SB815, HB3057, HB4603, HB3233, SB495, HB3863, HB3914, HB4570, HB5099, HB5173, SB458

Keywords: insurance, appraisal process, disputed losses, residential property, policyholder rights, insurer obligations, natural disasters, appraisal expenses, umpire selection, policyholder, insurer, umpire, claims management, health care, cost disclosure, benefit plan, administrators, traumatic brain injury, health benefit plans, insurance coverage

Bills: HF2601, HF2607, HF2027, HF2608

Keywords: financial institutions, insurance regulation, insurance holding company, group capital calculation, liquidity stress test, NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, insurer solvency, affiliate transactions, groupwide supervision, internationally active insurance group, lead state commissioner, policyholder protection, hazardous financial condition, deposit or bond, contract for deed, conventional loan, cooperative apartment loan, mortgage interest rate cap, average prime offer rate

Bills: HF2601, HF2607, HF2027, HF2608

Keywords: financial institutions, insurance regulation, insurance holding company, group capital calculation, liquidity stress test, NAIC, National Association of Insurance Commissioners, insurer solvency, affiliate transactions, groupwide supervision, internationally active insurance group, lead state commissioner, policyholder protection, hazardous financial condition, deposit or bond, contract for deed, conventional loan, cooperative apartment loan, mortgage interest rate cap, average prime offer rate

Transcript Highlights:

• canceling, or not renewing personal insurance policies when explicitly requested by the applicant or policyholder

Bills: HB139, HB1818, HB1942, HB1959, HB2221, HB2254, HB2563, HB2067, HB2275, HB3211, HB139

Keywords: HB 1818, Texas Insurance Code, Texas Department of Insurance, commissioner of insurance, health maintenance organization, HMO, insurer, utilization review, preauthorization, prior authorization, medical necessity review, health care services, medical care, insurance regulation, insurance examination, regulatory oversight, confidential records, public information exception, Chapter 843, Chapter 1301

Transcript Highlights:

• But people who are the client have not, or are not the policyholder.
• It does, and obviously in that situation, you're just—this is a current policyholder because he filed
• The policyholder actually finds out, "Oh, I can do this," and then they decide if they want to do it
• most of our clients are Texas policyholders.
• When do policyholders usually receive a copy of the policy that they purchased?

Bills: HB139, HB1818, HB1942, HB1959, HB2221, HB2254, HB2563, HB2067, HB2275, HB3211, HB139

Keywords: HB 1818, Texas Insurance Code, Texas Department of Insurance, commissioner of insurance, health maintenance organization, HMO, insurer, utilization review, preauthorization, prior authorization, medical necessity review, health care services, medical care, insurance regulation, insurance examination, regulatory oversight, confidential records, public information exception, Chapter 843, Chapter 1301

Transcript Highlights:

• ' policyholders and policyholders in the private market.
• And it's charged to policyholders and Citizens policyholders and non-policyholders alike.
• But as far as—are you talking about policyholders? Policyholders, yeah. Oh, okay.
• Policyholders and non-policyholders alike get hit with the emergency assessment.
• We assisted about 3,500 policyholders.

Summary: The Insurance and Banking Subcommittee received a lengthy presentation from Citizens Property Insurance Corporation CEO Tim Serio, with Insurance Commissioner Michael Yaworski also answering questions. Serio reviewed Citizens’ role as Florida’s insurer of last resort, its statutory funding structure, eligibility rules, depopulation program, reinsurance obligations, and the surcharge/emergency assessment mechanisms that can be used if Citizens runs a deficit. He emphasized that recent legislative reforms, combined with lower litigation and improved market conditions, have helped the private market recover and reduced Citizens’ policy count from a peak of about 1.41 million in 2023 to 936,182 at the end of 2024, with a projected drop to about 771,000 by the end of 2025. He also said the reforms reduced Citizens’ rate need and helped avoid an emergency assessment after the 2024 storms. Members asked about Citizens’ rate increases, why Citizens still seeks higher rates despite lower litigation, how the 20% eligibility threshold works, whether Citizens should be wind-only, and whether the state or federal government could help with deficits. Serio explained that Citizens is still charging below actuarially sound rates in most areas, that rate filings reflect reduced litigation and lower reinsurance exposure, and that assessments on all Florida property policyholders are the reason Citizens tries to build surplus and depopulate. He said the depopulation program is working better than in the past, with less than 2% of takeout policies returning to Citizens, and that the Office of Insurance Regulation has been vetting takeout companies more carefully. A substantial portion of the discussion focused on claims handling after Debby, Helene, and Milton, including flood-versus-wind disputes and Citizens’ use of the Division of Administrative Hearings for some claim disputes. Serio said Citizens had received 76,625 claims from the three storms and had paid nearly $823 million in indemnity and expenses as of January 7, 2025. He said many closed-without-payment claims were either below deductible, withdrawn, duplicate, or flood-only, and that Citizens had asked its internal audit function to independently review the claims data and denials. He also described Citizens’ storm outreach, catastrophe response centers, managed-repair program, and claim review process, and said the corporation remains focused on paying valid claims while minimizing the risk of assessments on the broader Florida market.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm a staff attorney speaking on behalf of United Policyholders in support of SB 429.
• I'm a staff attorney speaking on behalf of United Policyholders in support of SB 429.
• So this has just proven to be really unrealistic for policyholders experiencing loss.
• My name is Richard Otis, staff attorney, speaking on behalf of United Policyholders.
• Richard Otis, staff attorney speaking on behalf of United Policyholders.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee met to hear several bills related to insurance coverage, wildfire risk, workers’ compensation, and paid family leave. SB 8 by Senator Ashby would extend workers’ compensation and disability protections to Sacramento County park rangers, with testimony emphasizing that they perform law-enforcement-like duties and should receive the same protections as comparable officers. SB 429 by Senator Cortese would create a public wildfire catastrophe model and related wildfire safety program, with support from the Department of Insurance and consumer advocates who said public access to modeling data would improve transparency and help evaluate private insurance risk models. The committee also heard SB 525 by Senator Jones, which would require the FAIR Plan to offer coverage options for manufactured and mobile home owners, including replacement cost coverage. Supporters said the bill would help lower-income residents obtain meaningful insurance protection, while no opposition testified. SB 495 by Senator Allen, as amended, would require insurers to provide a larger contents-coverage advance after a total loss during a declared emergency without requiring an immediate itemized inventory, extend proof-of-loss deadlines, and require insurers to provide catastrophe modeling and reinsurance data to the Department of Insurance. Several insurers withdrew opposition after amendments, and the Department of Insurance and United Policyholders supported the measure. SB 590 by Senator Durazo would expand paid family leave to cover care for designated persons or chosen family members, with strong support from AARP, labor, civil rights, caregiving, and health organizations, and testimony from a parent describing the need to care for a non-legal family member during surgery recovery. The committee also took up consent items SB 230 and SB 854. After roll calls, SB 8, SB 429, SB 495, SB 525, and SB 590 all received do-pass votes, with SB 429 sent to the Committee on Emergency Management, SB 495 to Judiciary, and SB 525 and SB 590 to Appropriations. The consent calendar bills were also approved, and the committee adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• And they don't sufficiently specify why a policyholder is being dropped.
• I just mean that that's something that is so unactionable by a policyholder.
• This opacity makes compliance impossible for policyholders.
• I'm committed to addressing these gaps while protecting policyholders from increasing costs.
• I'm here on behalf of United Policyholders. We'll keep it short.

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee met to consider several insurance-related bills, with SB 1301 by Senator Allen and SB 876 by Senator Padilla receiving the most discussion. SB 1301 would reform residential property insurance non-renewals by requiring clearer written explanations, giving policyholders a chance to fix identified issues, and limiting non-renewals based on unreasonable grounds. The bill was supported by consumer advocates, fire survivors, local officials, and several organizations, while insurers said they had worked extensively with the author and were moving to neutral, though they still raised implementation and proprietary-information concerns. The committee voted to pass SB 1301 as amended to Appropriations, with the roll left open briefly before the bill was declared out. SB 876 would overhaul wildfire and disaster claims handling by requiring updated replacement-cost estimates, stronger extended replacement-cost and building-code coverage options, faster status updates when adjusters change, and other consumer protections. Supporters included the Department of Insurance, United Policyholders, consumer groups, and local representatives, who argued the bill addresses underinsurance, delays, and inconsistent claims handling exposed by recent wildfires. Several industry groups said recent amendments resolved major concerns and moved them to neutral, while the California Fair Plan remained respectfully opposed pending further review. The committee approved SB 876 as amended to Judiciary, again leaving the roll open briefly before finalizing the vote. The committee also took up a consent item, SB 536 by Senator Archuleta, which was approved unanimously to Appropriations. Other bills listed at the start of the hearing, SB 555 and SB 795, were pulled at the request of the authors and were not heard.

Transcript Highlights:

• And they don't sufficiently specify why a policyholder is being dropped.
• I just mean that that's something that is so unactionable by a policyholder.
• This opacity makes compliance impossible for policyholders.
• Hello, Joel Loucher, on behalf of United Policyholders, we strongly support this bill. Thank you.
• I'm here on behalf of United Policyholders. We'll keep it short.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Doesn't this bill encourage more policyholders to stay in Citizens? Do you think?
• You will have policyholders that will be placed with—hear me out.
• It's with the policyholders.
• It's with the policyholders. And I'm thinking. ...with the insurance companies.
• So I understand putting time limits on insurance companies, but not policyholders.

Summary: The committee met with a quorum and heard several insurance- and trust-related bills. CS/HB 265, relating to post-judgment execution proceedings involving terrorism, was presented as a measure to help victims enforce long-standing judgments against terrorist assets; it received no opposition in testimony and was reported favorably. CS/HB 1173, concerning the Florida Trust Code, clarified that the Florida Attorney General is the only public official with standing to enforce charitable trusts administered in Florida; members discussed that it was intended to resolve ambiguity identified by a court decision, and it also passed favorably. The committee then took up PCS/HB 643 on residual market insurers. The bill would remove the “diligent effort” requirement for surplus lines placements, revise surplus lines eligibility, and let Citizens policyholders elect arbitration through DOAH or the courts at renewal or issuance. The sponsor argued the changes would reduce red tape and give consumers more options, while an opponent from the Florida Justice Association warned that removing diligent-search protections could push more policyholders into higher-cost, less-regulated surplus lines coverage and that arbitration could favor insurers. Committee members raised concerns about the lack of premium credits for arbitration, the effect on Citizens, and the loss of consumer protections, but the bill was reported favorably. Finally, PCS/HB 1047 on insurance regulation generated extensive debate. The bill would reduce pre-licensure hours for general lines agents from 200 to 60, clarify restrictions on public adjuster conduct, require claims-handling manuals only for active residential property insurers, and define “sufficient evidence” for bad-faith claims with examples and a 10-day objection/response process. Supporters said it would streamline claims handling and clarify timelines; opponents and several members argued it could burden policyholders, especially after disasters, and might make it easier for insurers to delay or deny claims. There was also concern about the reduced training hours for new agents and the lack of detail on what constitutes sufficient evidence or a specific objection. After a divided debate, the bill was reported favorably by a 12-6 vote. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's an automatic adjustment to policyholders.
• Our TWIA policyholders have their cost for reinsurance premiums?
• Surcharge our policyholders an additional amount.
• It's an automatic adjustment to policyholders.
• We've never essentially gotten the benefit of it as a policyholder.

Keywords: 1185, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• or actually reserves that need to go back to the policyholders, and we're.
• We just want to make sure that policyholders are taken care of. See no further questions.
• , and that the policyholders themselves will?
• That should be determined by the mutual company, the policyholders themselves, because.
• You know, that could be determined up to the policyholders.

Bills: SB330, SB2069, SB2095, SB1721, SB1433, SB1316, SB1280, SB1455, SB1456, SB1457, SB1459, SB1461, SB1463, SB1465, SB1466, HJR1088, SB1684, SB378, SB1447, SB1920, SB1443, HR1047, SB1877, SB1884, SB1365, SB2174, SB1525, SB1810, SB1771, SB1805, SB1916, SB1530, SB1847, SB1990, SB2060, SB1992, SB1579, SB1778, SB2132, SB1623, SB2067, SB1589, SB1441, SB1224, SB372, SB1232, SB1264, SB1450, SB2011, SB2030, SB1980, SB1936, SB1477, SB1593, SB1725, SB1670, SB1480, SB1726, SB1633, SB1735, SB1632, SB1277, SB1217, SB1826, SB1824, SB1813, SB1326, SB1937, SB1641

Keywords: elk population, wildlife management, Oklahoma State University, veterinary medicine, ecosystem health, habitat assessment, waterfowl hunting, crane hunting, hunting guide, hunting outfitter, wildlife conservation, commercial hunting, outfitter license, guide license, hunting services, licensed guide, licensed outfitter, game and fish, hunting for compensation, waterfowl guide

Transcript Highlights:

• COMES TO ARBITRATION, WILL LIKELY REQUIRE A TERM OF SETTLEMENT THAT WOULD LIKELY PRECLUDE THE POLICYHOLDER
• THE TIME AND WHEN THE CASES WERE SETTLED LESS THAN 500 PERCENT WENT TO THE POLICYHOLDER.
• I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANYONE IN THIS BUILDING WHO HAS MORE EXPERIENCE REPRESENTING POLICYHOLDERS THAN
• I EXPECT THE BETTER OVER A DECADE REPRESENTATIVE SOMETHING POLICYHOLDERS AND THESE EXACT DISPUTES.
• BEFORE POLICYHOLDERS SIGN AND PAY THEIR HARD EARNED MONEY FOR THAT POLICY WE SHOULD REQUIRE THAT EVER

Transcript Highlights:

• lot has changed since our last hearing, but one thing remains the same: the number of Fair Plan policyholders
• I'll talk more about it, but in a nutshell, what it is: it's a platform for policyholders to move from
• It opens up the market, and then the policyholders have somewhere to go.
• Why is there so much growth among your policyholders now, or new policyholders?
• Why is there so much growth among your policyholders now or new policyholders in areas where your member

Summary: The Assembly Insurance Committee held an oversight hearing on the California Fair Plan, focused on the plan’s rapid growth, its financial stability after the January Southern California wildfires, and its role as the insurer of last resort. Fair Plan officials explained that the plan was created in 1968, is a not-for-profit involuntary association of licensed property insurers, and is intended to be a temporary safety net until policyholders can return to the admitted market. They emphasized that the plan is not a state agency or taxpayer-funded, but is regulated by the Department of Insurance and supported by member-company assessments if claims exceed available funds. Victoria Roach and Armand Feliciano said the Fair Plan has grown sharply since 2018 and especially after market pullbacks by major insurers, reaching about 575,000 policies and roughly $600 billion in exposure by spring 2025. They noted that growth is increasingly occurring in lower wildfire-risk areas, where the plan can sometimes be cheaper than the voluntary market, and said this undermines depopulation back into the private market. They also discussed recent policy expansions, including coverage for farms, higher residential and commercial limits, and pending or proposed changes such as AB 290, SB 525, and AB 226, which would add tools like a line of credit and bond access. A major portion of the hearing addressed the January wildfire losses and the plan’s financial response. Fair Plan officials said they assessed member insurers for $1 billion after determining claims and cash flow would exceed available resources, and that the process was approved quickly and paid smoothly, with more than 80% of the assessment collected within 10 days. They also described the reinsurance tower, the plan’s limited surplus, and the need for actuarially sound rates to reduce future reliance on assessments. On claims handling, they said the plan has received over 5,500 claims from the fires, has paid more than $2.9 billion so far, expects total payments near $4 billion, and has focused on advancing payments quickly for total losses and other urgent needs. Members questioned the plan’s solvency, the growth in non-wildfire areas, claim denials, smoke-loss coverage, and how depopulation works. Roach said most closed claims without payment were duplicates rather than denials, and that smoke claims require direct physical loss under the policy, with coverage determined case by case. Public commenters from the California Building Industry Association and the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of California said the Fair Plan’s growth reflects a weak voluntary market, inadequate rates, and insurer fear of future assessments, and urged support for rate increases and AB 226. The hearing concluded with no vote, but with a commitment from Fair Plan officials to follow up on unanswered questions and continue providing more transparency through public data and website disclosures.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our policyholders have spent more money by the double and triples.
• get refunds from that money back to the policyholder?
• It’s going back to the policyholder in the way of new premiums. No, ma’am.
• Checks are going right back to the policyholder. You’re recognized. Correct.
• And the types of policyholder litigation that I’m talking about...”

Summary: The Insurance and Banking Subcommittee met to hear and vote on several bills, with all measures reported favorably. The first major item was PCS for HB 175 on payment stablecoins, which would create a Florida regulatory framework aligned with the federal GENIUS Act so issuers can choose state regulation instead of federal licensing. Members asked extensive questions about how stablecoins differ from other digital assets, whether Florida would need federal approval, and what impact the bill would have on the Office of Financial Regulation; the sponsor and OFR said the state framework would mirror federal standards and that any workload increase was currently indeterminate. The PCS passed unanimously after testimony from OFR and the Florida Blockchain Business Association in support. The committee then approved CS for HB 961, which streamlines electronic signature requirements for salvage titles and certificates of destruction, and HB 1415, a DFS stablecoin pilot program allowing certain stablecoins to be used for licensing and regulatory fees. HB 1415 was amended to remove authority for a Florida coin, limit the pilot to established stablecoins with at least $1 billion market cap, and require secure custody through a public depository or custodial bank. Members discussed how any interest or revenue would be used, with sponsors saying the pilot was still exploratory and intended mainly to cover program costs. Both bills passed favorably. HB 1039, establishing a state cryptocurrency reserve, also passed after a strike-all amendment moved administration of the reserve from the CFO’s office to the State Board of Administration and tightened eligibility to cryptocurrencies with a $100 billion market cap over the prior 12 months. Supporters argued the bill would create a framework for future diversification and investment in established digital assets, while several members raised concerns about volatility, reporting frequency, and the meaning of new terms such as qualified liquidity provider and secure custody solution. The committee also passed CS for HB 951 on penny rounding for cash transactions, with an amendment clarifying cash transaction definitions and treating money orders and gift cards like credit-card transactions for rounding purposes.

Transcript Highlights:

• Today, we have more than 272,000 policyholders in our coastal counties, and as shown on page nine of
• The 1st $500 million of public securities are backed by TWEA policyholder premiums and the authority
• to impose surcharges on TWEIA policyholders.
• So 50 to 60 cents out of every premium dollar from our policyholders will go towards reinsurance.
• Our, our goal is to facilitate policyholders and applicants knowing all of their options, and that's

Transcript Highlights:

• And United Policyholders greatly appreciate your leadership on this issue.
• United Policyholders greatly appreciates your leadership on this issue.
• Another provision that's important is that the image be given to the policyholder.
• I'm Joel Laucher on behalf of United Policyholders. We support this bill. Thank you.
• Joel Laucher on behalf of United Policyholders supports this bill. Thank you.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Summary: The Senate Committee on Insurance met as a subcommittee due to a lack of quorum, and first heard AB 1559 by Assembly Member Calderon. The bill would add consumer protections when insurers use aerial imagery for underwriting or coverage decisions by requiring notice before collecting images, giving policyholders access to images used, and allowing an in-person inspection if an image is used to non-renew, cancel, or reduce coverage. The Department of Insurance and United Policyholders supported the measure, citing complaints about outdated or inaccurate drone, satellite, and aircraft images; local governments, AARP, and Realtors also supported it, and there was no opposition. The committee later voted 6-0 to pass AB 1559 to the Privacy Committee. The committee also heard AB 2038 by Assembly Member Harabedian, which would extend wildfire-related non-renewal moratoriums for homeowners, including extending protections for total-loss properties and homes within or near a fire perimeter. Supporters, including the Consumer Federation of California, United Policyholders, and the League of California Cities, argued that rebuilding after major fires is taking much longer than expected and that homeowners need more time and stability. Opponents from the insurance industry warned that extending moratoriums, especially to adjacent zip codes, could further constrain insurers, worsen availability and affordability, and push more business to the FAIR Plan. Senators raised concerns about the zip-code-based perimeter and whether the bill should be tied to home-hardening standards, but the author said the bill simply extends existing timelines and would continue negotiations on amendments. The committee voted 4-0 to send AB 2038 to Appropriations. File items 1 and 3 were taken up as consent items and approved 6-0. The committee then adjourned.