HB 4098
Provides that a violation of prohibitions against certain practices with respect to insurance is subject to an enforcement action under the Unlawful Trade Practices Act.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
37%
Oppose
63%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill amends Oregon’s Unlawful Trade Practices Act to broaden its application to violations related to insurance practices. Specifically, it removes an exemption for insurance from the definition of ‘real estate, goods, or services,’ allowing for enforcement actions against insurance-related misconduct. It also requires the Department of Consumer and Business Services to seek approval from a prosecuting attorney before taking action against insurance-related violations and permits courts to award equitable relief in addition to monetary damages. The bill aims to provide greater consumer protection against deceptive or unfair insurance practices.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of HB 4098 agree that Oregon consumers face significant challenges when filing insurance claims, including confusing language, long delays, and denials, leading to financial harm and delayed care. They argue that the bill will close gaps in accountability and enforcement within the insurance industry by revising the Unlawful Trade Practices Act (UTPA) and eliminating its insurance exemption, ensuring insurers operate fairly and are held accountable for harming customers. Advocates emphasize the need for stronger consumer protections, citing the lack of enforcement authority under current laws and the resulting harm to consumers, with many testifiers sharing personal experiences of trauma, financial hardship, or frustration with the insurance industry, highlighting the importance of holding insurance companies to the same ethical standards as other businesses in Oregon.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of House Bill 4098 express concerns that the bill would increase insurance costs, exacerbate the existing housing affordability crisis, and negatively impact small businesses and rural communities. They argue that adding private lawsuits to the Unfair Claims Settlement Practices Act would lead to excessive litigation, higher premiums, and reduced access to coverage, ultimately harming consumers' financial stability and economic growth. Additionally, testifiers caution that the bill's proposed regulation would create overlap with existing laws, undermine regulatory authority, and drive businesses out of Oregon, further straining the state's competitiveness in agriculture, seed production, and other industries.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.