Somehow SMART needs to address the antitrust concerns of the titel insurance industry. FTC v. Ticor, et. al. (1992) must be addressed so that title insurance companies have the same rights and privileges of the P&C insurance industry.
The PIA concerns are well-founded. A top-down apporoach model is most effective when it provides incentives to the state regulators to adopt the federal model, not one that imposes the regulations on top of the existing patchwork of state regulation.
The PIA remarks on licensing are also on-target. While the NAIC model (i.e. from my perspective, the National Producer Database) has made licensing much easier in the past year, the mosaic of overlapping and disaparate licensing requirements for non-resident brokers/agents remains an expensive, confusing and time consuming task for any agency trying to offer a unique product in states where the broker is acting as a foreign entity.
Somehow SMART needs to address the antitrust concerns of the titel insurance industry. FTC v. Ticor, et. al. (1992) must be addressed so that title insurance companies have the same rights and privileges of the P&C insurance industry.
The PIA concerns are well-founded. A top-down apporoach model is most effective when it provides incentives to the state regulators to adopt the federal model, not one that imposes the regulations on top of the existing patchwork of state regulation.
The PIA remarks on licensing are also on-target. While the NAIC model (i.e. from my perspective, the National Producer Database) has made licensing much easier in the past year, the mosaic of overlapping and disaparate licensing requirements for non-resident brokers/agents remains an expensive, confusing and time consuming task for any agency trying to offer a unique product in states where the broker is acting as a foreign entity.
in our state already licensed agents are not allowed to sell title insurance. why?