§ 33.29. [Reserved].
Source The provisions of this § 33.29 amended through March 24, 1978, 8 Pa.B. 1677; reserved September 15, 2000, effective September 16, 2000, 30 Pa.B. 4812. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (212002) and (219729) to (219730).
Notes of Decisions Authority of Department
While the required records doctrine would appear to authorize investigations of automobile insurance plan applications, under this section, it does not empower the Insurance Department to search other documents without warrant or subpoena. Reiter v. Insurance Department, 525 A.2d 446 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987); appeal denied 534 A.2d 770 (Pa. 1987).
Illustrative Cases
By requiring applicants to the Pennsylvania Automobile Insurance Plan to pay a $20 fee for services to petitioner’s insurance agency, petitioner violated the provisions of this regulation. Seidman v. Insurance Commissioner, 532 A.2d 917 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987).
Petitioner’s failure to adequately explain several 5 day delays between date of application and remittance of the premium payment and application to the Plan, constituted violations of this section. Seidman v. Insurance Commissioner, 532 A.2d 917 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987).
Insurance Effective Date
The trial court erred in finding that automobile insurance coverage became effective on March 6, the date of the accident, when the electronic binding of the application was not submitted until March 7, one day after the accident. The insurance company, as the assigned insurer, was bound by the effective date of coverage as indicated by the application; it was not bound by the date a third party received payment from the insured. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. v. Johnson, 676 A.2d 680 (Pa. Super. 1996); affirmed 704 A.2d 127 (Pa. 1998).
If the applicant has presented reasonable documentation of an application, the Insurance Commissioner properly applied Insurance Department regulations, rather than the guidelines of the Pennsylvania Assigned Risk Plan, to establish the application date as the effective date of assigned risk policies. Motorists Mutual Insurance Co. v. Insurance Commissioner, 586 A.2d 1050 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1991).
Payment Method
The requirement under this section prohibiting a producer from accepting cash, does not violate 31 U.S.C.A. § 5103 and exists for important public policy reasons. Seidman v. Insurance Commissioner, 532 A.2d 917 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987).
Petitioner violated this section when he accepted cash from applicants and purchased money orders on their behalf. Seidman v. Insurance Commissioner, 532 A.2d 917 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987).
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.
This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
