A California agency faces reinsurer lawsuits over millions in commissions. Now its own insurer says its policy doesn't cover the fight.
Great American E&S Insurance Company has gone to federal court to argue it owes nothing to the insurance agency it covered - National Transportation Associates - in a series of reinsurer lawsuits, and it wants back the defense money it has already spent.
In a complaint filed July 16, 2026 in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, Great American asked for a declaratory judgment that its professional liability policies do not cover NTA, plus reimbursement of its defense costs.
The underlying fight is playing out in Texas. Several reinsurers allege that NTA, acting as a general agent, kept commissions and fees it should have returned. NTA's commission rose or fell with the loss ratio on the policies it placed - the better the loss performance, the bigger its cut. According to the complaint, the reinsurers claim NTA "intentionally misrepresented facts bearing on loss performance" to boost what it kept.
The demands add up. According to the complaint, Antares alleges NTA owes more than $8 million, Technology Insurance Company claims $691,377.11, MS Amlin says over $12.6 million, JRG Reinsurance seeks approximately $3,425,636.80, and Continental Indemnity puts its figure at least $10,616,032.55.
Great American wrote three professional liability policies for NTA between June 2022 and June 2025, each with a $5 million per-claim limit and a $5 million aggregate limit, according to the complaint.
Great American leans on one exclusion in particular. Exclusion F strips coverage for "any Claim based upon, arising out of, or directly or indirectly involving the return of any commission, fee, cost, or expense previously paid or retained." Because the reinsurer suits are all about returning commissions, the insurer says, they fall outside the policy.
Great American also points to NTA's application. On the April 6, 2022 form, NTA was asked about recent claims and any circumstances that might lead to one. According to the complaint, it answered "No" both times - even though, Great American alleges, a predecessor reinsurer had already demanded access to NTA's premium trust account records in November 2020.
Rather than deny the defense outright, Great American paid under a reservation of rights and sued for a ruling. It relies on Buss v. Superior Court, the 1997 California Supreme Court decision, to argue it can recover defense costs for claims it says were never covered.
None of this has been tested in court - not the reinsurers' claims against NTA, nor Great American's coverage position. No court has ruled on the merits.
