Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable Clay Cotten Opinion No. M-255 Commissioner of Insurance State Board of Insurance Re: Authority of the In- 1110 San Jacinto surance Commissioner, Austin, Texas 78701 as a bond obligee under Article 6.09, Insurance Code of'Texas to re- lease a surety bond Dear Mr. Cotten: under stated conditions You request the opinion of this office as to whether the Commissioner of Insurance, as named obligee on 'a surety bond heretofore filed under the provisions of former Article 6.09 of the Insurance Code of Texas, has authority to exe- cute an effective release of such bond. You state that "(1) the foreign insurer (principal on the bond) is in receiver- ship under the provisions of Article 21.28 of the Insurance Code of Texas; (2) more than one year has passed from the time specified by the court order for the filing of claims against the insurer's receivership estate; (3) all known claims against and obligations of the insurer arising from policies issued during the period covered by the bond have been fully satisfied and paid; and (4) the court in which the delinquency proceedings are pending has authorized the re- ceiver to execute a release of the bond on behalf of the principal." Article 6.09 of the Insurance Code requires a fire insurance company, not organized under the laws of Texas, to guarantee its lawful obligation to citizens of Texas by de- positing a bond with the Insurance Board or securities with the State Treasurer. It further provides that when a bond is deposited, it "shall be kept in force until all claims of such citizens arising out of obligations of said company have been fully satisfied , . ." (Art. 6.09, Texas ~InsuranceCode). r Assuming that the receiver has complied with all statutory prerequisites,all claims of Texas citizens against the company must be deemed fully satisfied as to the receiver - 1237 - .. .- Honorable Clay Cotten, page 2 M- 255 when all known claims have been presented to and paid by the receiver and the time for filing claims has passed. -- Froof of claims against the company may in "no event" be filed "later than one (1) year a he court's order specifying the time which are not filed within the expiration of such one-ye:zr p~,"~tec~~~~~c~PaAt~tfn2~n~~d~s~S~~~~~~ ;ofdih;f Texas (Emphasis added.) After the security deposit has served its intended purpose of protecting Texas policyholders to the extent allowed by statute, the Insurance Commissioner no longer has the authority to withhold such deposits from its right- ful owner, For many years, it has been the consistent pr,zctice of the Insurance Commissioner to release securities deposited with the Board in accord with Art. 610, Texas Insurance Code, when sufficient evidence is presented to the State Board of Insurance that all liabilities under the policies issued ,::.~r- ing the particular years for which the deposit has been made were extinguished. Former Insurance Commissioners have consistently r?,:- hered to the policy of taking affidavits from fire insurance companies as to the existence of possible future liabilities and considering these affidavits as sufficient evidence for them to execute such a release. As a rule of statutory construction, courts are in- clined to accept an administrative interpretation of a statute if such interpretation has been accepted without challenge over a long period of time, Texas Employers' In- surance Ass'n. v. Holmes, 145 Tex. 158, 196 S .W .2d 390,--%$.2. The only difference between the facts of former administrative practice and those of the present inquiry is that instead of the companv acting for itself, it is here re- presented by an Ancillary Receiver and instead of a deposit of securities, there is a DOnd fully secured by government bonds as collateral. The last sentence of former Art. 6.09 indicates a clear legislative intent that a deposit of securities and a giving of a bond should be treated in the same manner and as accomplishing the same effect: - 1238 - Honorable Clay Cotten, page 3 M-255 "Any company desiring to do so may, at its option, in lieu of giving bond required by this article, deposit securitSes of any kind in which it may lawfully invest its funds with the State Treasurer upon such terms and conditions as will~in all respects afford the same protection and indemnity as herein pro- vided for to be afforded by said bond." The only reason for the requirements of Articles 6.09 and 6.10 is to guarantee the faithful performance of the company's obligations to the citizens of Texas. If the Insurance Commissioner can perform his duty in administering the provisions of the Insurance Code by re- leasing a securities deposit upon receipt of affidavits from the company that all known claims have been paid and the statutory time has expired for presentation of any other claims, then reason, statutory construction, and legal ana- logy all dictate that he has the same authority to perform an equivalent act to implement an identical purpose. Thus, the Insurance Commissioner must of necessity have the im- plied authority to execute a release of a surety bond upon being satisfied that no further valid claims exist against the surety bond as an asset of the receivership estate. It is our opinion that in this connection he may rely upon an affidavit of full performance by the liquidator-receiver. The Insurance Commissioner is not vested with any authority to withhold such security from its rightful owner once the liquidators receiver attests to the fact of faithful performance in compliance with the applicable statute. The requirements of Article 6.09 having been fully satisfied, the Insurance Commissioner as obligee, has the authority and the duty to join the Ancillary Receiver in ex- ecuting a release so that collateral guaranteeing the surety bond may be released to the receiver for the purpose of paying off other creditors in the receivership estate. SUMMARY ------- The Insurance Commissioner, as a bond obligee under Article 6.09, Texas Insurance Code, has authority to release a surety bond on an in- surance company in receivership when he is satisfied that no valid claims exist against such bond as an asset of the receivership es- tate and the receiver by affidavit shows that - 1239 - Honorable Clay Cotten, page 4 M-255 al.1claims have been fully satisfied and that the one year statutory time limit contained in Article 21.28 8 3, Texas Insurance Code, has expired. Prepared by Charles T. Rose Assistant Attorney General APPRCVED; OPINION COMMITTEE Hawthorne Phillips, Chairmsn Kerns Taylor, Co-Chairman John Grace Harold Kennedy Ch,ariesBardwell John Fainter A. J. Carubbi, Jr. Executive Assistant Attorney General -12407