Archives: 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008

This proceeding arose upon a request for hearing made by Juanita Edwards to contest the pending nonrenewal of automobile insurance coverage provided by MMG Insurance Company. On June 2, 2003, the insurer mailed a notice of nonrenewal effective August 1, 2003 on policy number AC10865557, citing as the grounds for nonrenewal: “conviction of an insured of a crime having as one of it’s necessary elements an act increasing hazards insured against: Herbert Edwards, DOB 12/04/1948; Class D criminal terrorizing conviction.”. Pursuant to 24-A M.R.S.A. 2920, the insured's hearing request was timely.

A hearing in this matter was held on July 16, 2003 with Connie Mayette sitting as designated hearing officer, pursuant to 24-A M.R.S.A. §§ 210 and 2920. The purpose of the hearing was limited to establishing the existence of the proof or evidence given by the insurer to support its reason for policy nonrenewal. Staff representing MMG Insurance Company appeared at the hearing. Juanita and Herbert Edwards represented themselves at the hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT
The following facts have been proven by a preponderance of evidence submitted:

1. MMG Insurance Company insures the vehicles of Juanita Edwards.
2. Herbert Edwards was convicted in 1999 of criminal terrorizing in relation to a verbal altercation with a neighbor.

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION OF LAW
Title 24-A M.R.S.A. § 2916-A permits an insurer to nonrenew a policy of automobile insurance if based upon a reason for which the policy could be cancelled pursuant to § 2914 (nonpayment of premium, fraud or material misrepresentation affecting the policy or a claim, violations of terms or conditions of the policy, or the suspension or revocation of a driver's license during the policy term or within 180 days preceding its effective date); for specific convictions or accidents occurring within the 36 months preceding the annual anniversary date of the policy; or when there is a material change in the type of vehicle insured that renders the vehicle uninsurable. All of the permitted convictions relate to the use of a motor vehicle.

Jim Stout, Marketing Representative for MMG, testified that the insurer had misinterpreted the grounds permitted by statute for a cancellation of a homeowners policy, and mistakenly believed the same grounds could be used for an auto policy. He indicated that the nonrenewal notice on the auto policy would be rescinded, but the Bureau has not received any indication that has been done.

The Superintendent of Insurance has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 24-A M.R.S.A. § 2920. MMG Insurance Company bears the burden of proof for establishing that the statutory grounds for policy nonrenewal exist. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing, the Superintendent hereby concludes that MMG Insurance Company has not established adequate grounds for policy nonrenewal.

Title 24-A M.R.S.A. § 2916-A(1)(B) permits nonrenewal for conviction of homicide or assault arising out of the operation of a motor vehicle, criminal negligence in the use or operation of a motor vehicle resulting in the injury or death of another person, or use or operation of a motor vehicle directly or indirectly in the commission of a felony. Mr. Edward’s conviction does not fall into any of those categories. His conviction was a misdemeanor, not a felony, and did not involve the use of a motor vehicle either directly or indirectly.

INDEX OF RECORD:
Exhibit 1 – Postal Proof of Mailing
Exhibit 2 – Auto Notice of Nonrenewal
Exhibit 3 – Homeowners Notice of Nonrenewal
Exhibit 4 – Copy of Auto Policy
Exhibit 5 – Copy of Homeowners Policy
Exhibit 6 – Claims Report to Underwriting
Exhibit 7 – 8/96 Claim Information
Exhibit 8 – Court Complaint
Exhibit 9 – Docket Disposition

ORDER AND NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS
The intended nonrenewal is not approved. MMG Insurance Company is directed to renew Juanita Edwards’ automobile coverage. As the expiring policy was a Portfolio Package with the homeowners policy, it is recognized that the renewal will be on a monoline policy form.

This Decision and Order is a final agency action within the meaning of the Maine Administrative Procedure Act. It is appealable to the Superior Court in the manner provided in 24-A M.R.S.A. § 236 and M.R. Civ. P. 80C. Any party to the hearing may initiate an appeal within 30 days after receipt of this notice. Any nonparty whose interests are substantially and directly affected may initiate an appeal within 40 days of the effective date of this Decision and Order.

Return to Cancellation / Nonrenewal Hearing Decisions