InfoBytes Blog
Filter
Subscribe to our InfoBytes Blog weekly newsletter and other publications for news affecting the financial services industry.
NYDFS issues guidance on AI insurance discrimination
On July 11, NYDFS issued Insurance Circular No. 7 to address the use of AI systems and External Consumer Data and Information Sources (ECDIS) in the underwriting and pricing of insurance policies in New York State. NYDFS outlined its expectations for insurers regarding the responsible and compliant use of the technologies, emphasizing the need to abide by existing laws and regulations that prohibit unfair discrimination.
Key points in the circular included:
- Definitions of AI systems and ECDIS, and insurers will be expected to understand that “traditional underwriting” does not include the use of these technologies.
- Insurers must conduct proxy assessments to ensure ECDIS will not result in discrimination based on protected classes. The circular also clarified what the proxy assessment may entail.
- NYDFS expected insurers to maintain robust governance and risk management practices, including board and senior management oversight, policies and procedures, and risk management frameworks.
- Insurers will be responsible for the oversight of third-party vendors providing AI systems and ECDIS, ensuring compliance with laws and regulations.
- NYDFS will not guarantee the confidentiality of submitted information, as it must comply with disclosure laws.
- The circular emphasized transparency, requiring insurers to disclose the use of AI systems and ECDIS in underwriting and pricing decisions, and to provide reasons for any adverse decisions to consumers.
- Insurers must keep up-to-date documentation and be prepared for NYDFS audits and reviews regarding the use of these technologies.
FINRA fines annuity and fund distributor for causing payment of transaction-based compensation to unregistered entity
On July 8, FINRA accepted a firm’s Letter of Acceptance, Waiver, and Consent imposing a censure and a $300,000 fine. The firm is a wholesale distributor of variable insurance products and mutual funds. Between March 2018 and September 2019, FINRA alleged that the firm caused around $2.9 million in compensation to be paid to an unregistered entity. More specifically, according to the AWC, the Firm had paid around $8.7 million in transaction-based compensation to an unaffiliated selling broker-dealer concerning the sale of variable life insurance, a securities product. Of that, FINRA alleges that the Firm directed the unaffiliated broker-dealer to direct $2.9 million to an LLC that was not affiliated with the firm and that was not a FINRA member. As a result, FINRA alleged that the firm violated FINRA Rule 2040 which prohibits FINRA members from paying transaction-based compensation to any person not registered as a broker-dealer if receipt of such payment would require such person to register as such.
NYDFS issues guidance insurers regarding discrimination in affordable housing market
On June 24, Gov. Kathy Hochul announced guidance issued by NYDFS in Circular Letter No. 6 (2024) informing insurers and related parties that, under the new Insurance Law § 3462, making coverage decisions based on a property’s status as an affordable housing development or on the amount or source of a tenant’s income will be prohibited. According to the Circular Letter, the recently enacted law came in response to a “hardening” insurance market that has resulted in increased premiums and reduced coverage options for affordable housing developments. Under the law, insurers cannot base decisions such as issuing, renewing, or increasing premiums for policies on whether a property was an affordable housing development or if tenants received government assistance. The guidance noted that “excess line insurers, and the New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association (NYPIUA) must comply with Insurance Law § 3462 and can no longer request information about government-subsidized housing units or tenants paying rent with housing assistance or use this information for underwriting purposes,” and were required to update their insurance applications and underwriting guidelines accordingly. If insurance rates were previously based on these factors, insurers must revise their rates and submit them to NYDFS.
NYDFS issues loss mitigation guidance for property insurance
On May 23, NYDFS issued Insurance Circular Letter No. 3 (2024) which encouraged all insurers – authorized to write property/casualty insurance in New York – to offer loss mitigation tools and services to the insured for free or at a reduced fee. Insurers are encouraged to offer devices like smart water monitors and provide discounts for the installation of loss prevention systems, such as smoke alarms and sprinkler systems. Additionally, the letter reminded insurers of their obligation to provide an actuarially appropriate reduction in rates for the installation of hurricane/storm shutters and hurricane-resistant windows and doors. It opined that any such tools or services offered by an insurer that are $25 or less in market value need not be specified in the insurance policy, while those exceeding $25 must be. This initiative, the letter stated, will aim to create a more affordable and resilient insurance market.
Colorado enacts insurance proceeds disbursement requirements for mortgage servicers
On May 20, Colorado enacted HB24-1011 (the “Act”), which predominantly addressed mortgage servicers’ disbursement of insurance proceeds.
The Act states that, upon the borrower’s request, mortgage servicers must disclose the specific conditions under which the servicer will disburse insurance proceeds in the event that the underlying property was damaged and an insurance company paid proceeds to satisfy the claim. Among other requirements, if the borrower is not delinquent or was less than thirty-one days delinquent in respect of his or her mortgage payments, the borrower is responsible for creating a repair or rebuild plan for the mortgaged property and submitting such plan to the mortgage servicer for approval. In turn, the mortgage servicer is responsible for approving or denying a plan within thirty days of receipt. Additionally, the borrower is entitled to reimbursement of certain advance payments made to a contractor or to purchase materials for the repair or rebuild. The Act outlines a different process if a borrower is more than thirty-one days delinquent on a mortgage payment. The Act provides for additional details regarding the disbursement of proceeds, including the amounts of disbursement.
Additionally, the Act provides that (1) mortgage servicers must disclose, among other items of information, the mortgage interest associated with mortgages upon the commencing of servicing and thereafter as the request of the borrower, and (2) a mortgage servicer must keep all communications with a borrower for at least four years. The Act became effective upon passage.
NYDFS offers guidance to insurers on AI models
On January 17, NYDFS issued a guidance letter on artificial intelligence (AI) intended to help licensed insurers understand NYDFS’s expectations for combating discrimination and bias when using AI in connection with underwriting. The guidance is aimed at all insurers authorized to write insurance in New York State and is intended to help insurers develop AI systems, data information systems, and predictive models while “mitigat[ing] potential harm to consumers.”
The guidance letter states that while the use of AI can potentially result in more accurate underwriting and pricing of insurance, AI technology can also “reinforce and exacerbate” systemic biases and inequality. As part of the letter’s fairness principles, NYDFS states that an insurer should not use underwriting or pricing technologies “unless the insurer can establish that the data source or model… is not biased in any way” with respect to any class protected pursuant to New York insurance law. Further, insurers are expected to demonstrate that technology-driven underwriting and pricing decisions are supported by generally accepted actuarial standards of practice and based on actual or reasonably anticipated experience. It was last noted that these rules build on New York Governor Hochul’s statewide policies governing AI.
7th Circuit: Insurer required to cover BIPA defense
On June 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit upheld a district court’s ruling requiring an insurance company to defend an Illinois-based IT company against two putative class actions alleging violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The insurance company sued for a declaration that, under its business liability insurance policy, it has no obligation to indemnify or defend the IT company in the two class actions. Class members alleged the IT company acted as a vendor for a company that “scraped” more than 3 billion facial scans and converted them into biometric facial recognition identifiers, which were then paired to images on the internet and sold via a database to the Chicago Police Department, in violation of BIPA.
The insurance company’s policy bars coverage for any distribution of material in violation of certain specific statutes or in violation of “[a]ny other laws, statutes, ordinances, or regulations” and asserted that this catch-all provision includes BIPA. The district court disagreed, ruling that the language of the policy’s statutory violations exclusion was “intractably ambiguous” and did not explicitly bar coverage of the underlying suits.
On appeal, the 7th Circuit agreed that the district court was correct in determining that a plain-text reading of the insurance policy’s “broad” and ambiguous catch-all coverage exclusion for “personal or advertising injury” would “swallow a substantial portion of the coverage that the policy otherwise explicitly purports to provide.” The 7th Circuit held that “the broad language of the catch-all exclusion purports to take away with one hand what the policy purports to give with the other in defining covered personal and advertising injuries.”
Although the 7th Circuit considered whether there was a “common element” related to privacy in the enumerated statutes that could be read to include BIPA, ultimately the appellate court determined that nothing in the exclusion language “points to privacy as the focus of the exclusion.”
NYDFS announces winter storm relief
On December 27, NYDFS announced actions to provide financial relief to New Yorkers in the Western and North Country regions in the aftermath of a historic winter storm. The relief is part of New York’s continuing and comprehensive efforts to address the historic winter storm that caused statewide devastation. According to the announcement, NYDFS requested that state-chartered banking organizations, federally-chartered banks, and credit unions operating in the area provide fee-free access services to nearby customers and non-customers while travel conditions remain dangerous. NYDFS will also issue temporary adjuster permits to qualified out-of-state independent insurance adjusters to expedite insurance claims in light of the winter storm. Expediting permits will increase the number of adjusters available to process claims and help New Yorkers get their claims paid faster. Insurers are encouraged to make any necessary applications on the NYDFS website. NYDFS urged the insurance industry to work towards a fair and speedy resolution of all claims and provide the necessary resources to do so.
Bank agrees to pay $1.8 billion to settle RMBS bond insurance claims
On October 7, a national bank announced in a regulatory filing that it has agreed to pay $1.84 billion to settle claims brought by a bond insurer concerning policies provided on residential mortgage-backed securities before the 2008 financial crisis. According to the regulatory filing, the agreement will “resolve all pending [bond insurer] lawsuits” (containing damages claims of more than $3 billion) against the bank and its subsidiaries, will cause all pending litigation to be dismissed with prejudice, and will release the bank and its subsidiaries from “all outstanding claims” related to bond insurance policies for certain securitized pools of residential mortgage loans.
Treasury requests feedback on cyberinsurance
On October 7, the U.S. Treasury Department published its Annual Report on the Insurance Industry, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. The report discussed the U.S. insurance industry’s financial performance and its financial condition for the year ending December 31, 2021, and provided a domestic outlook for the industry for 2022. The report also summarized the Federal Insurance Office’s (FIO) activities and addressed certain matters affecting the domestic and international insurance industry.
Earlier, Treasury issued a request for input in the Federal Register on a potential federal insurance response to catastrophic cyber incidents. According to Treasury, “the comments will inform FIO’s work in responding to a recommendation by the U.S. Government Accountability Office that FIO and the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency jointly assess the extent to which the risks to U.S. critical infrastructure from catastrophic cyberattacks warrant a federal insurance response.” The request stated that cyber insurance is a significant risk transfer mechanism, and that the insurance industry has an important role to play in strengthening cyber hygiene and building resiliency. Comments are due November 14.