Here’s a novel theory to consider. Anyone who drives without insurance and is otherwise incapable of paying for damages and injuries he/she may cause should not be permitted to recover from an insured driver. You either play by the rules or you don’t.
Once again, the responsible subsidize the irresponsible. What is the incentive to get insurance? How could this “turn-a-blind-eye” attitude not encourage the growing problem of insurance fraud?
While I realize these are tough economic times and it is hard to afford things, the state needs to protect those who make the sacrifice and are financially responsible.
Agreed. The worst is, it is the uninsured drivers who’s irresponsiblity increases the costs for the insureds. As the costs increase more insureds will be forced to reduce their limits or drop the insurance, thus creating a downward spiral.
Heck, we should just nationalize auto insurance…have the government pay for it for all of us. Seems to be the trend these days in Washington…
i think most of you have not really read this article. the crux lies in the following: “Before voting, the Senate removed a section that would have barred uninsured drivers from collecting punitive damages in lawsuits filed over traffic accidents.”
if i am being sued by a driver who does not have insurance because i was at-fault for an accident, why should he collect anything? afterall, he’s not supposed to be on the roads w/o valid insurance. his vehicle and passengers would not have been hurt if he had abided by the law. he should not recieve any kind of payment. now if he hit me, and i had valid insurance, i expect that my um coverage would be pay for me. i would hope that the insurance company definately goes after the um driver for subgro. this would apply to those folks that drive on a suspended license or expired license. you have to be a responsible person.
again, the accident should only be with those that have a valid license and insurance. if you don’t have either, then you have no right to be on the road.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
This change has nothing to do with claimants or fairness. It is all about compensation of trial lawyers.
Thank you Ann. All states should make this a law. CA has it. Maybe it would put those TV lawyers out of business.
Here’s a novel theory to consider. Anyone who drives without insurance and is otherwise incapable of paying for damages and injuries he/she may cause should not be permitted to recover from an insured driver. You either play by the rules or you don’t.
AMEN…I’m tired of the double standards and paying for people to lazy to work.
California already has this law- It is Proposition 213- I feel it is great.
I am surprised to hear more states do not have it.
Once again, the responsible subsidize the irresponsible. What is the incentive to get insurance? How could this “turn-a-blind-eye” attitude not encourage the growing problem of insurance fraud?
While I realize these are tough economic times and it is hard to afford things, the state needs to protect those who make the sacrifice and are financially responsible.
Agreed. The worst is, it is the uninsured drivers who’s irresponsiblity increases the costs for the insureds. As the costs increase more insureds will be forced to reduce their limits or drop the insurance, thus creating a downward spiral.
Heck, we should just nationalize auto insurance…have the government pay for it for all of us. Seems to be the trend these days in Washington…
i think most of you have not really read this article. the crux lies in the following: “Before voting, the Senate removed a section that would have barred uninsured drivers from collecting punitive damages in lawsuits filed over traffic accidents.”
if i am being sued by a driver who does not have insurance because i was at-fault for an accident, why should he collect anything? afterall, he’s not supposed to be on the roads w/o valid insurance. his vehicle and passengers would not have been hurt if he had abided by the law. he should not recieve any kind of payment. now if he hit me, and i had valid insurance, i expect that my um coverage would be pay for me. i would hope that the insurance company definately goes after the um driver for subgro. this would apply to those folks that drive on a suspended license or expired license. you have to be a responsible person.
again, the accident should only be with those that have a valid license and insurance. if you don’t have either, then you have no right to be on the road.