Dearie v NAIC.Solvency

edited March 29 in Dearie.Excess

In the NAIC.Solvency wiki page it states that: "In very general terms, NRRA gives an insurer's home state exclusive authority to regulate the placement of nonadmitted insurance."

In Dearie, the wiki page states that the NRRA "limits regulatory authority of surplus lines to an insured's home state."

Will the insurer's home state and insured's home state always be one in the same when it comes to surplus lines? Or more simply put, are these 2 statements contradictory?

Comments

  • It's a little confusing because we're dealing with reinsurance.

    • In the NAIC.Solvency wiki page (paragraph 5-57), when I referred to "insurer" I was referring to the ceding insurer.
    • In the Dearie.Excess wiki page, when I referred to "insured", I was again referring to the ceding insurer who was being insured by a reinsurer in another state.

    In general terms, it's the domiciliary state of the insurer doing the ceding that essentially has authority over that insurer under NRRA.

  • That helps, thanks. Is surplus lines only a reinsurance coverage? I was under the impression that surplus lines could be either a primary insurance or reinsurance coverage?

  • You're right, it can be primary or reinsurance. In my mind, I was thinking "reinsurance" because of the first "R" in NRRA, (which stands for reinsurance.) I changed the wiki to use the term "customer" so hopefully it's clearer now. Thanks.

Sign In or Register to comment.