Oklahoma Senate Bill SB726

Oklahoma 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/4/25
• Report Pass: 3/6/25
• Engrossed: 3/25/25
• Refer: 4/1/25
• Report Pass: 4/16/25

Caption

Insurance; providing certain exception. Effective date.

Impact

The amendments introduced by SB726 aim to enhance the claims process for insured individuals by ensuring that insurers are held accountable for timely communication regarding claims. By formalizing the required response times and the conditions under which a prevailing party in a legal action can claim costs and attorney fees, the bill seeks to promote fairness in claims handling. It specifically states that if the insured prevails in a covered claim, they may be entitled to interest on the judgment from the point the loss was payable, enhancing consumer protection.

Summary

Senate Bill 726 focuses on amending provisions related to the proof of loss under insurance contracts in Oklahoma. The bill mandates insurers to provide forms of proof of loss upon a written request from the insured. It delineates the responsibilities of insurers when it comes to processing these proofs of loss and establishes a clear timeline for responding to claims, specifically requiring insurers to make a written offer of settlement or rejection of a claim within sixty days of receiving proof of loss.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB726 has been largely positive, particularly among consumer advocacy groups who argue that the bill could lead to more transparency and faster resolutions for those filing claims. Proponents believe that by enforcing stricter timelines and clearer responsibilities for insurers, the bill could alleviate some of the frustrations policyholders face during the claims process. However, there may be concerns among the insurance industry about the implications of these requirements for operational flexibility and costs.

Contention

Some notable points of contention regarding SB726 might arise from the definitions of 'prevailing party' and the interest rates stipulated for judgments. The bill specifies that in instances where an insurer's offered settlement was not exceeded by the judgement, the insurer is considered the prevailing party. This introduces an aspect of potential contention regarding how claims are processed and the fairness of the settlement offers made by insurers. There could be debates about the balance between consumer rights and the operational burdens imposed on insurers.