2002 Minnesota Statutes

     79.252 Assigned risk plan. 

    Subdivision 1.    Purpose.  The purpose of the assigned 
 risk plan is to provide workers' compensation coverage to 
 employers rejected by a licensed insurance company pursuant to 
 subdivision 2.  

    Subd. 2.    Rejected risks.  An insurer that refuses to 
 write insurance for an employer shall furnish the employer a 
 written notice of refusal.  The employer shall file a copy of 
 the notice of refusal with the data service organization under 
 contract with the commissioner pursuant to section 79.251, 
 subdivision 4.  

    Subd. 3.    Coverage.  (a) Policies and contracts of 
 coverage issued pursuant to section 79.251, subdivision 4, shall 
 contain the usual and customary provisions of workers' 
 compensation insurance policies, and shall be deemed to meet the 
 mandatory workers' compensation insurance requirements of 
 section 176.181, subdivision 2.  

    (b) Policies issued by the assigned risk plan pursuant to 
 this chapter may also provide workers' compensation coverage 
 required under the laws of states other than Minnesota, 
 including coverages commonly known as "all states coverage."  
 The commissioner may apply for and obtain any licensure required 
 in any other state to issue that coverage.  

    Subd. 4.    Responsibilities.  Assigned risk policies 
 and contracts of coverage are subject to taxation under chapter 
 297I, and special compensation fund assessments under Minnesota 
 Statutes 1990, section 176.131, subdivision 10.  The assigned 
 risk plan shall be a member of the reinsurance association for 
 the purposes of sections 79.34 to 79.40 and may select either 
 retention limit provided in section 79.34, subdivision 2.  

    Subd. 5.    Rules.  The commissioner may adopt rules as 
 may be necessary to implement section 79.251 and this section.  

    HIST: 1983 c 290 s 6; 1984 c 640 s 32; 1Sp1985 c 10 s 72; 1992 
 c 510 art 3 s 6,7; 1993 c 13 art 2 s 1; 1993 c 299 s 31; 1995 c 
 233 art 2 s 56; 2000 c 394 art 2 s 20; 2002 c 387 s 6