Correcting the Record (July 01, 2008)

June 30, 2008 | Last updated on October 1, 2024
2 min read

I am writing to address information reported in the May 2008 cover story, “Need for Speed” with respect to the Nova Scotia Insurance Review Board (NSIRB). In particular, the article reported that due to slow turnaround times, “an insurer has taken the Nova Scotia Insurance Review Board to court because of the length of time it alleges the board took to approve the companies proposed 8% premium decrease.” I would like to take the opportunity to clarify two items: (1) the turnaround times of the NSIRB, and (2) any court action involving company applications to the NSIRB.

The NSIRB recognized the first applications filed under the legislative reform took longer to complete than desired. Since its first year of existence, the NSIRB has continually improved turnaround times on applications while upholding its statutory obligation to ensure rates and risk-classification systems are just and reasonable.

The second item I wish to clarify deals with the quoted text in the first paragraph above suggesting that an insurance company took the NSIRB to court because of a slow turn-around time.

The NSIRB has not had any insurance company initiate court action related to turnaround times. The article does not identify the company in question. However, I can confirm that two companies, which are affiliated with one another, did appeal the NSIRB orders on their initial 2004 applications through the appeal level of the NSIRB and, subsequently, to the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. The right to appeal a decision of the NSIRB is provided for in Nova Scotia’s Insurance Act and companies are entitled to exercise that right. In both of the above noted cases, the companies were requesting rate changes of 0% and were ordered to take significant decreases by the NSIRB.

The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal allowed the appeals and sent them back to the NSIRB to be decided in light of reasons of the court. The NSIRB issued new orders for these cases, ordering decreases of 8% and 9.5% for the two companies. The two companies have again exercised their right to appeal these decisions and are scheduled to have the appeal heard by an appeal panel of the NSIRB in late July 2008.

I thank you for the opportunity to clarify the facts associated with the only legal proceedings the NSIRB has been involved in since its inception. It is important that your readers are provided with an accurate depiction of this matter as well as the balance the NSIRB must strive to achieve in addressing the needs of the industry while fulfilling its legislated mandate.