- 65 - program, as proposed to be restructured, might violate State insurance regulations. No contemporaneously prepared documentary evidence was presented to indicate that petitioner had such concerns or to indicate that petitioner analyzed the alleged problem and considered the steps necessary to deal with its alleged concerns.30 Mr. Johnson's testimony on cross-examination is revealing: Q. Your concern about possible state regulation, you never discussed this with the [sic] anybody at the ICC, did you? A. I did not. No. Q. And you're not aware of anybody at UPS ever discussing it with anybody at the ICC. A. I'm not aware of it. 30During 1983, Mr. Corde of Frank B. Hall inquired about how other Hall clients handled cargo coverage in connection with analyzing the proposed UPS declared value program. Mr. Doug Brown of Hall prepared an internal memorandum to Mr. Corde dated Mar. 2, 1983, outlining the arrangements of other companies which were Hall clients. The concluding paragraph of Mr. Brown's memorandum states: In my discussions with Frank B. Hall people and underwriters, the opinion with regard to the legality of selling shippers interest when in fact neither client is a licensed insurance agent was that provided the carrier is simply requesting an acceptance or declination from the shipper for the insurance does not put them in a brokerage or agency position. I find this questionable especially since both clients that I reviewed are doing very little domestic Shippers Interest coverage, consequently, the problem may not have arisen.Page: Previous 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011