A new package of preliminary legislative proposals from the Oklahoma Insurance Department has drawn sharp criticism for sidestepping soaring homeowners insurance premiums while introducing measures that could make it harder for policyholders to challenge insurers in court.
Announced Dec. 10, the proposals focus largely on technical and procedural changes. They would expand Oklahoma’s fortified roof program, require insurers to cover roofs that meet certain age and condition standards, and impose tighter timelines for claim acknowledgement and coverage decisions.
A homeowners bill of rights is also floated, though details remain thin.
Critics say what’s missing matters more. The proposals do not directly confront rapid premium increases, a central concern for Oklahoma homeowners.
Instead, they include provisions aimed at discouraging lawsuits against insurers, based on the argument that litigation costs drive rates higher.
In a joint statement, Rep. Mark Tedford and Sen. Aaron Reinhardt, both Republicans from Jenks, pointed to attorneys’ fees as a key factor behind rising premiums. They did not address long-standing features of Oklahoma law that allow insurers to raise rates with limited regulatory scrutiny.
I really don’t like litigation in a property claim. In my opinion, when there’s litigation it drags the claim out, adding costs to both sides.
Rep. Mark Tedford
Tedford acknowledged earlier this fall that lawmakers had discussed revisiting the Property and Casualty Loss Cost Rating Act, the statute governing homeowners insurance rates. He later confirmed that the Insurance Department asked legislators not to amend the law. Draft bills for the upcoming session now reflect that request.
Tedford also voiced a preference for resolving disputes through third-party adjusters rather than courts. Litigation, he said, drags claims out and raises costs on both sides. That view sits uneasily with many policyholders.
Insurance Commissioner Glen Mulready declined requests for comment.
Skepticism sharpened after recent high-profile disputes. Tulsa Police Lt. Billy Hursh became a visible figure among hundreds of State Farm policyholders who sued after roof damage claims were denied.
In a Dec. 4 petition seeking to intervene in Hursh’s case, Gentner Drummond described alleged racketeering within the insurance industry.
Hursh said parts of the proposed package sounded constructive, but the litigation limits raised red flags. Restricting the award of attorneys’ fees, he argued, would deter ordinary homeowners from pursuing valid claims. Most people can’t afford to pay legal fees out of pocket. Insurers can.
Data on insurers’ litigation spending isn’t public. Lobbying figures are. From 2014 through 2023, U.S. insurance companies spent about $130 mn per year on lobbying efforts, according to public disclosures.
According to Beinsure analysts, Oklahoma’s debate reflects a broader national fault line. Regulators and insurers frame legal reform as cost control. Policyholders see it as a barrier to accountability.
With premiums climbing and trust eroding, that gap keeps widening.
