Poizner Announces $37.3 Million Settlements From Fremont Indemnity Company
Font size:
The Commissioner has succeeded in recovering up to $37.3 million
Sacramento, CA (CompNewsNetwork) - California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner announced today that the Conservation & Liquidation Office (CLO) has settled four lawsuits that arose from the 2003 failure of Fremont Indemnity Company (Fremont), a national workers' compensation insurer that was headquartered in Glendale, CA. Under these hard fought settlements, the Fremont liquidation estate will receive up to $37.3 million from a number of defendants.
"The Insurance Commissioner is legally tasked with representing the policyholders and other creditors of the now-defunct insurance company," said Commissioner Poizner. "I am very pleased to have obtained this significant recovery - worth tens of millions of dollars - for Fremont's policyholders, injured worker claimants and creditors, particularly from a bankrupt enterprise like Fremont General."
Fremont was one of dozens of workers' compensation insurance companies that failed during the workers' comp crisis of 1999 to 2003, and was one of the largest California-based workers' comp insurers, writing more than $800 million in premiums in its final year of full operations. After Fremont was placed into liquidation in 2003, the Commissioner's CLO conducted a thorough investigation of the company's operations and management. That investigation eventually resulted in four lawsuits being filed on behalf of the Fremont liquidation estate. The purpose of all of these cases was to recover money for the benefit of policyholders, injured worker claimants, and other creditors of Fremont.
The Lawsuits
The first two lawsuits were filed in 2004 and were entitled Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corporation, et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case Nos. BC 316472 and BC 320766). These actions were filed against Fremont's parent companies, Fremont Compensation Insurance Group (an intermediate holding company) and Fremont General Corporation, Fremont's ultimate parent company. The actions arose primarily out of the treatment of Fremont under the parent company's consolidated federal income tax returns and under certain tax sharing arrangements among the companies (The Tax Cases).
In 2006, the CLO filed another case, entitled Insurance Commissioner v. Rampino, et al. (Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 357691), alleging that seven former directors and officers of Fremont breached their fiduciary duty to Fremont by engaging in a scheme which violated Fremont's duties to its reinsurers prior to Fremont's insolvency. The scheme involved a practice known as "net line underwriting" which was intended to benefit Fremont at the expense of its reinsurers. The lawsuit alleged that the scheme resulted in the reinsurers asserting claims for rescission of multiple valuable reinsurance treaties, which ultimately had to be settled at a loss to Fremont. (The D&O Case)
The forth and final lawsuit, entitled Insurance Commissioner of the State of California v. Fremont General Corp., et al. (United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, Case No. Adv. Proc. No. 8:08-ap-01258-ES), was filed in 2008 and arose out of a dispute over the ownership of a corporate fine art collection valued at more than $4 million (The Art Case). This art collection included numerous photographs by famed photographer Ansel Adams.
The Fremont General Bankruptcy & Settlements Of The Lawsuits
In addition to its failed insurance company operations, Fremont General was also the owner of a sub-prime mortgage lender, Fremont Investment & Loan (now known as Fremont Restructuring Corporation). The failure of Fremont Investment & Loan in 2008 resulted in Fremont General filing for bankruptcy protection in June 2008. The filing of the bankruptcy case resulted in an automatic statutory "stay" of the lawsuits against Fremont General. The CLO preserved Fremont's claims against Fremont General by filing several claims in the Fremont General bankruptcy case. The D&O Case was allowed to proceed to trial because the defendants were individuals not directly involved in the Fremont General bankruptcy case.
The CLO's claims, its participation in the Fremont General bankruptcy proceeding, and the ongoing trial in the D&O Case eventually led to global settlement discussions among all the parties in the cases. These settlement talks were successful, and resulted in two separate settlement agreements.
The first settlement resolved the Tax Cases, the Art Case, and the claims filed by the CLO in the bankruptcy case. The second settlement resolved the D&O Case. Through these settlements, the Commissioner has succeeded in recovering up to $37.3 million for the benefit of the Fremont estate. The benefits received or to be received by
Fremont under the Settlements include:
* Immediate cash payment of $5 million from Fremont Restructuring Corporation
* Immediate receipt of $4.1 million in proceeds from the sale of the Art Collection
* Control over the equity interest in Fremont Life Insurance Company, currently valued at approximately $1.2 million
* Two allowed general creditor claims against the Fremont General bankruptcy estate in the total face amount of $40 million, on which the Fremont liquidation estate is entitled to receive up to, and expects to receive prior to the end of the year, distributions of $27 million
When the full value of the settlements is realized later this year, the Fremont estate will have up to $37.3 million in additional funds available to pay policyholder claims in its liquidation. In addition to the recovery of these funds, the settlement of the Tax Cases also provides for the preservation of more than $600 million in beneficial tax attributes (so called "net operating loss carryforwards" or "NOLs") for the benefit of Fremont. The preservation of this massive portfolio of NOLs will assist the Commissioner in protecting Fremont from exposure to federal income tax liabilities for the duration of the liquidation process.
The settlement agreement in the D&O Case also resolved certain collateral matters in which neither the Commissioner nor the Fremont estate were involved. Specifically, the agreement resolves several employment and retirement benefit plan claims against Fremont General by several of the individual D&O defendants. That unrelated settlement between these individuals and Fremont General did not have any negative impact on the amount of recovery received by the Commissioner nor did it delay the benefits due to Fremont under the settlements. In fact, Federal ERISA law shields the assets of retirement benefit plans from being seized as part of an insurance liquidation proceeding, like the Fremont liquidation. Disputes over the retirement plan benefits are strictly between Fremont General (as the plan sponsor) and the individual participants.
Add to:
LinkedIn
LinkedIn
Email to a friend
Print version
Plain textYou're Reading A
Featured Series
Look Forward To
A year long series covering the trends and changes that will shape our industry, from some of the most influential names in comp today.
Only from the WorkersCompensation.com CompNewsNetwork
Only from the WorkersCompensation.com CompNewsNetwork
A News Partner
Rate this article
Comments (1 posted):
The current California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner is perpetrating a fraud upon the American Public.
http://www.workerscompensation.com/compnewsnetwork/news/poiznerfremont.html
California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner has just settled a multi-year, multi-state lawsuit of $489 Million claim against Fremont General for only $37.3 Million.
In fact Poizner's own California Insurance Department's Conservation and Liquidation Office shows that Fremont left $1.64 Billion in accepted; but unfunded workers' compensation claims.
Dec. 31, 2008 Net Assets (Deficiency) $(1,642,180,980)
http://www.caclo.org/perl/index.pl?document_id=b4baea13abb7bce3e54b035b2111bda3
What was not disclosed by Mr. Poizner was the undisclosed "Conflict of Interest" of former California Insurance Commissioner Harry Low who allowed this to happen.
===========================
For example:
November 16, 2000
Internal CDI Memo Discusses Fremont
http://www.wcexec.com (archives)
PAGE 1 OF 5
"Background: Fremont consists of five insurance companies; four California-domiciled insurers and one Illinois-domiciled insurer. Primary as a result of adverse [259%] loss experience in workers' compensation insurance, Fremont is statutorily insolvent. As of June 30, 2000 Fremont's "statutory" surplus is estimated to be negative $19 Million.
California DOI ISSUE MEMORANDUM Nov. 16, 2000
PAGE 3 OF 5
ARGUMENTS CON
1.) “This is a non-traditional approach to dealing with a troubled insurer. This approach could be perceived by some as (including competitors) as rewarding poor management behavior (and even incompetence) with favorable regulatory treatment”
2.) "THE COMMISSIONER [HARRY LOW] AND THE DEPARTMENT MAY BE CRITICIZED FOR 'MASKING' FREMONT'S FINANCIAL PROBLEMS WITH AN ACCOUNTING GIMMICK"
================================
Then on July 2, 2002 Harry Low signed a sweetheart agreement that allowed Fremont to escape over $1.64 Billion in claims that were picked up by the employers, employees and taxpayers of this country.
July 2, 2002
Fremont's Agreement with California Insurance Commissioner Harry Low
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/38984/000003898402000009/doiagreement7022002.txt
What hasn't been disclosed was former Insurance Commissioner Harry Low who signed that July 2, 2002 sweetheart agreement with Fremont that allowed Fremont to escape paying $1.64 Billion dollars of workers' compensation claims was the undisclosed "Conflict of Interest" in that Harry Low was formerly on the Board of Directors of one of Fremont's banks, the Union Bank of California.
Harry Low was on the that banks "Credit Policy and Review Committee" when the Union Bank of California made a $25 million dollar loan to Fremont and that this bank was holding 343,490 shares (SEC filings) of Fremont General's common stock, in 2000, just prior to Harry Low taking office and Fremont General's Insurer was reporting a 259% combined loss ratio.
Prior to taking office in 2000 as California Insurance Commissioner Harry Low personally held 5,536 Shares of Union Bank of California's stock,(SEC filings) that could have been negatively effected if Fremont had collapsed in 2000.
Harry Low also allowed Fremont General to transfer $200 Million to fund the start up of Fremont Investment and Loan that went on to become the third largest subprime lender in the country before it also collapsed in 2007.
How can California Republican Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner walk away from a mufti-year $489 Million + dollars in claims for an insignificant $37.3 million out of a $489 million, in bankruptcy claims (out of a an unfunded loss for California of $1.64 Billion) as was stated on Fremont's 1/13/2009 Bankruptcy proceedings for pennys on the dollar) and then Mr. Poizner has the audacity run for Governor of California on a platform of fiscal accountability!
http://www.stevepoizner.com/
Post your comment