One of my pet peeves about the New York Liquidation Bureau over the years has been its inability (or refusal) to acknowledge in practice the difference between liquidation and rehabilitation under Article 74 of the Insurance Law. Unfortunately the Bureau’s Mission Statement as posted on its web site perpetuates the problem (www.nylb.org/mission.htm).
The Mission Statement avers that the Liquidation Bureau acts for the Superintendent of Insurance to “. . . return rehabilitated companies to the marketplace or distribute the proceeds of the company in a timely manner to creditors.” Under §7403 the rehabilitator’s statutory function is to “conduct the business” of the company in rehabilitation, and to take steps “toward the removal of the causes and conditions” that made the rehabilitation necessary. There is no statutory authority for the rehabilitator to “distribute the proceeds of the company in a timely manner to creditors.” That can only be done in liquidation, which is a separate proceeding with different statutory rules.
If the New York Liquidation Bureau wants the insurance community to believe it has a new attitude about its role in rehabilitations, it might want to consider revising its Mission Statement to reflect the law.
For a more extensive review of the receivership process, particularly in New York, see my article, “Who Protects us from the Reciever?” at https://www.pbnylaw.com/articles/whoprotectsusfromthereciever-11-04.pdf.