Michigan Court of Appeals; Docket No. 124651; Published
Judges Cynar, Weaver, and Griffin; Unanimous
Official Michigan Reporter Citation: 185 Mich App 256; Link to Opinion 
STATUTORY INDEXING:
Obligations of Admitted Insurers to Pay PIP Benefits on Behalf of Nonresidents Injured in Michigan [§3163(1)]
TOPICAL INDEXING:
Not Applicable
CASE SUMMARY:
In this unanimous Opinion by Judge Griffin, the Court of Appeals revisited its previous decision in Safeco Insurance Company v Economy Fire (Item No. 1346) and dealt with the issue of how a foreign insurance. company can properly revoke its Michigan no-fault certification under §3163 of the statute. In the Safeco case, the court held that a §3163 certification was not automatically revoked by defendant's decision to cease underwriting no-fault insurance in Michigan. Left unresolved in the Safeco decision was the method for withdrawal of a §3163 certificate for companies who no longer do business in Michigan and who do not wish to afford their non-resident insureds the benefits of the Michigan no-fault system. Addressing that issue in the instant case, the Court of Appeals noted that the Michigan Insurance Commissioner had promulgated a rule that for an insurance company to withdraw its §3163 no-fault certification, all that is required is a written request from the company that the certificate be withdrawn. In the instant case, the defendant insurance company was advised of this rule, and accordingly, submitted a written request to the insurance commissioner in December 1985 withdrawing all certificates, policy forms, endorsements, etc. effective January 1, 1986 on new business and for all renewals of in force policies beginning March 1, 1986. In a letter dated July 17, 1989, the Michigan Insurance Bureau acknowledged defendant's notice of withdrawal of §3163 certification and stated that the withdrawal would be honored and that the "effective date of this withdrawal is September 1, 1989." The plaintiff was involved in a severe accident on October 16, 1988, and the issue was whether or not the §3163 withdrawal was effective when the defendant insurance company submitted written notification to the Bureau or when the Bureau stated that the withdrawal would be effective. In holding that the date of notification of withdrawal is the effective date of termination of §3163 certification, the court stated:
"Based on the documentary evidence presented to the trial judge in this matter, we agree that reasonable minds could not differ and that at the time of plaintiff’s accident, defendant's Michigan no-fault certificate had been withdrawn. On December 12, 1985, defendant's president by letter to the Michigan Insurance Commissioner specifically revoked all insurance certificates. The certification pursuant to §3163 clearly falls within this definition. As noted by the December 15, 1987 and December 29, 1987 letters to defendant from the Michigan Insurance Bureau, for decertification 'all that is required is a written notice.' Thus, we hold that defendant effectively withdrew its §3163 no-fault certification form on December 12, 1985 and is therefore not liable to plaintiffs for the Michigan no-fault automobile insurance claimed. The insurance commissioner inexplicably placed an effective date of September 1, 1989 on defendant's withdrawal of its no-faul certificate… In the instant case, the insurance commissioner promulgated a rule that for an insurance company to withdraw its §3163 no-fault certification all that is required is a written request. It necessarily follows that the withdrawal of the no-fault certificate must be promptly honored after such a request. We find the commissioner's failure to do so for almost four years to be most arbitrary and capricious."
