Where does either state have any jurisdiction on this sale? Just another example of easte and politics and the growing trend to fascism in our economic system
The state’s main objective should be to see if the entity is financially sound after the purchase. Is their debt issues of the buyer that may impact the future of the entity. We all pay for insolvencies. If this is not the issue, the sale should go through.
Proposition 103 (November 8, 1988) states that the Commissioner has up to one year to approve, modify, or reject rate change requests by carriers (or other change requests, such as adding or removing discounts, etc.). If the Department has up to a year for things which are minutiae, in comparison to a carrier being sold or leaving the State, then it should stand to reason that the Applied Underwriters’ attorneys should have known to give the State at least a full year for this decision, notwithstanding their self-imposed September 30 deadline, instead of “giving up” on the State after only six months. I stand with CA & against Applied, in this case. (I would like to see what any statute does say about carrier sale decision time).
Where does either state have any jurisdiction on this sale? Just another example of easte and politics and the growing trend to fascism in our economic system
The state’s main objective should be to see if the entity is financially sound after the purchase. Is their debt issues of the buyer that may impact the future of the entity. We all pay for insolvencies. If this is not the issue, the sale should go through.
Proposition 103 (November 8, 1988) states that the Commissioner has up to one year to approve, modify, or reject rate change requests by carriers (or other change requests, such as adding or removing discounts, etc.). If the Department has up to a year for things which are minutiae, in comparison to a carrier being sold or leaving the State, then it should stand to reason that the Applied Underwriters’ attorneys should have known to give the State at least a full year for this decision, notwithstanding their self-imposed September 30 deadline, instead of “giving up” on the State after only six months. I stand with CA & against Applied, in this case. (I would like to see what any statute does say about carrier sale decision time).