Texas House Bill HB2834

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of House Committee: 4/28/11
• Introduced: 3/10/11
• Refer: 3/17/11
• Report Pass: 4/12/11

Caption

Relating to insurer receivership.

Impact

The proposed changes are designed to streamline the receivership process and enhance protections for policyholders and creditors. By establishing clear criteria and prioritization of claims, HB2834 aims to ensure that claims are handled efficiently during a company’s financial crisis. Additionally, it allows for the appointment of special deputies in emergency situations without the usual competitive bidding process, which proponents argue is necessary to expedite decision-making during critical times for the insurer and its stakeholders.

Summary

House Bill 2834 addresses the process of insurer receivership in Texas. This legislation seeks to amend existing laws regarding how insurance companies in distress are managed, particularly when they face insolvency or require liquidation. The bill outlines specific grounds for initiating proceedings for rehabilitation or liquidation, focusing on the insurer's financial health and management practices. It also emphasizes the importance of the commissioner's role in managing delinquency and safeguarding the interests of policyholders and creditors.

Conclusion

In summary, HB2834 serves as a comprehensive measure to reform insurer receivership laws in Texas, reflecting a balance between the need for efficient management of failing insurers and the protection of consumer interests. The ongoing discussion surrounding this bill highlights the complexities of insurance regulation and the significant impacts that legislative changes can have on all stakeholders involved.

Contention

However, notable points of contention arise from the scope of the commissioner's powers and the removal of certain competitive bidding requirements. Critics of the bill may argue that these provisions could lead to a lack of transparency and abuses of power if the processes for appointing special deputies are not closely monitored. Additionally, there may be concerns about the adequacy of protections for policyholders and whether the prioritization of claims sufficiently considers the needs of smaller creditors in the context of a liquidation.