Nova Scotia’s insurance regulator approved changes to United General Insurance Corporation’s private-passenger automobile rates, but prohibited two proposed rating classes because they could make marital status affect the price. In United General Insurance Corporation, 2026 NSRAB 25, issued February 13, 2026, the Nova Scotia Regulatory and Appeals Board approved the application subject to that condition.
The changes produced an overall increase of 16.1 per cent across coverages combined. That was a portfolio-wide figure, not an increase prescribed for every policy. The board approved the rates and classification changes effective April 1, 2026, for both new business and renewals.
Different experience bands created a marital-status problem
United sought to offer more competitive rates as inexperienced drivers accumulated years of driving experience. Its existing system used the same rating differential across several classes of inexperienced male principal operators. The proposed system would distinguish those classes rather than wait until drivers had been licensed for nine years or more.
Classes 8 and 9 were for married male principal operators, divided into drivers licensed for up to five years and those licensed for more than five but fewer than nine. Classes 10 through 13 used narrower experience bands for unmarried male principal operators. With different prices attached to those bands, a married and an unmarried driver with the same experience and otherwise identical characteristics could pay different rates.
Board member Marc L. Dunning found that result would conflict with the prohibition on marital status as a risk-classification factor. United had to use Classes 10 through 13 for all inexperienced male principal operators, whether married or not. The reasons expressly noted that the problem had not arisen when the existing differentials were all the same.
United acknowledged during the review that it would not use the proposed differentials for Classes 8 and 9, explaining that it had included them to keep its structure consistent with New Brunswick. The board made the restriction a condition of approval. It still allowed the company to report risks under those class numbers to the automobile statistical plan if required: the prohibition concerned rating, not statistical reporting.
Rate increase approved using a lower profit assumption
The board’s broader task was to decide whether the proposed rates and risk-classification system were just and reasonable and complied with the Insurance Act and its regulations. Board staff reviewed the filing, sought additional information and shared their recommendations with United, which had no further comments on the staff report.
United initially used a 12 per cent target after-tax return on equity and a 1.5-to-one premium-to-surplus ratio. It argued that, as a monoline mutual insurer, it had limited opportunities to raise capital or diversify risk. The board accepted that those circumstances could justify a higher profit provision, but found that the company had sought an adjustment in both assumptions.
The board instead accepted a 10 per cent target return on equity while retaining the 1.5-to-one ratio. It used staff’s calculations as the benchmark for assessing the filing. These were ratemaking assumptions, not a guarantee of the insurer’s actual profit.
United’s proposed increases were below the indicated need for mandatory coverages combined and optional coverages combined. The company had considered competitors’ prices and the impact on renewal customers in deciding not to seek the full indicated increases. The board concluded that the proposed overall change was supported and would produce a return below the recommended 10 per cent level.
Discount and coverage changes also approved
The approval also expanded eligibility for United’s 10 per cent multi-vehicle discount and 15 per cent support discount to other relatives living in the same residence, including siblings and elderly parents. The company would offset the pricing effect so the expansion was revenue-neutral overall. It was not an across-the-board reduction in the premiums the insurer would collect.
The board allowed a new five per cent discount for alumni of specified Maritime universities. The proposal was limited to two alumni and two vehicles per household, with rules directing the discount to the highest-rated vehicle or vehicles. Two eligible alumni sharing one vehicle would receive a single five per cent discount, not a doubled discount.
Other approved changes included a new $750 deductible option and a reduction of the minimum deductible to that amount. The board also approved increasing the maximum vehicle value covered under the non-owned automobile endorsement from $50,000 to $75,000, with a higher premium, and adding a $2,500 loss-of-use coverage option. Those figures described insurance options, not compensation awards.
The decision set December 1, 2027, as United’s next mandatory filing date for private-passenger vehicles. It also required an updated electronic insurance manual within 30 days after the order in the matter was issued. The reasons stated that an order would follow; this report does not independently establish the date of that separate order or the company’s subsequent implementation.
The ruling illustrates a limit on harmonizing an insurer’s products across provinces: a classification structure used elsewhere cannot be used to charge Nova Scotia policyholders differently on a prohibited basis. The board approved the wider filing while preserving that restriction, rather than rejecting the entire rate application.
