Uninsured In Oklahoma? You Could Get Towed

Posted & filed under Oklahoma Car Insurance, Uninsured Motorists.

The Insurance Journal is reporting an alarming new bill that was recently approved by the Oklahoma House of Representatives.

House Bill 2331, which was proposed by Representative Steve Martin (R-Bartlesville), Oklahoma drivers who are caught driving without auto insurance could have their vehicles impounded by the police.

Martin says the bill, which was overwhelmingly approved by the House in an 87-8 vote, will authorize Oklahoma law enforcement officers to use a newly established instant verification system that enables them to determine whether or not a vehicle is covered by the state’s required amount of liability insurance. If a vehicle is found to be uninsured, the police would then have the ability to have it towed away immediately.

Representative Martin says that there are studies which suggest as many as a quarter of all Oklahoma drivers are on the road without insurance coverage.

Some members of the Oklahoma House have expressed concern with the new verification system’, questioning its accuracy. It’s also possible that there may be an issue with how to handle passengers who may be in the vehicles to be towed, especially if they are children.

The bill must still be approved by the Oklahoma state Senate before it becomes law.

Some members expressed concern about the accuracy of the new verification system and the fate of passengers in the vehicle, especially children.

Legal Battle over California's Prop 17 Heats Up

Posted & filed under California Car Insurance.

California’s Sacramento Bee reported last week that the legal battle over the language in ballot initiative Proposition 17, which addresses auto insurance discounts.

Consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield, well-known in California as a vocal opponent of Proposition 17, filed a lawsuit in the Sacramento Superior Court on March 4th, The suit demands that the language in the proposition summaries that will be sent to voters. This suit is in direct response to another suit filed the week before by backers of Proposition 17, a group which is led by auto insurer Mercury General Corp.

In their lawsuit, the pro-Prop 17 camp claimed their opponents are misleading the voters. Rosenfield’s suit alleged the same things of Mercury.

The continuing debate is over a discount that insurers are already able to offer their customers who have maintained continuous coverage, and have not missed any premium payments. With Proposition 17, Mercury Insurance wants to make this discount “portable” – meaning they can offer it to customers of other companies. Mercury’s argument is that this will make the California insurance landscape more competitive.

Rosenfield, on the other hand, opposes the proposition because he feels that insurance should be a “zero-sum system.” His concern is that those drivers who don’t qualify for the discount will be stuck paying surcharges to make up for the discounts others are receiving.

The proposition is set for the June ballot.

Legal Battle over California’s Prop 17 Heats Up

Posted & filed under California Car Insurance.

California’s Sacramento Bee reported last week that the legal battle over the language in ballot initiative Proposition 17, which addresses auto insurance discounts.

Consumer advocate Harvey Rosenfield, well-known in California as a vocal opponent of Proposition 17, filed a lawsuit in the Sacramento Superior Court on March 4th, The suit demands that the language in the proposition summaries that will be sent to voters. This suit is in direct response to another suit filed the week before by backers of Proposition 17, a group which is led by auto insurer Mercury General Corp.

In their lawsuit, the pro-Prop 17 camp claimed their opponents are misleading the voters. Rosenfield’s suit alleged the same things of Mercury.

The continuing debate is over a discount that insurers are already able to offer their customers who have maintained continuous coverage, and have not missed any premium payments. With Proposition 17, Mercury Insurance wants to make this discount “portable” – meaning they can offer it to customers of other companies. Mercury’s argument is that this will make the California insurance landscape more competitive.

Rosenfield, on the other hand, opposes the proposition because he feels that insurance should be a “zero-sum system.” His concern is that those drivers who don’t qualify for the discount will be stuck paying surcharges to make up for the discounts others are receiving.

The proposition is set for the June ballot.

Kansas Rethinks Ignition Interlock Notification Requirement

Posted & filed under DUI, Kansas Car Insurance.

Kansas is running into a serious debate with regard to its ignition interlock program for drivers convicted of DUIs. The devices, which prevent cars from starting unless the driver passes a breathalyzer test, have been in use in the state for some time, but a proposed amendment would remove a requirement forcing convicted drivers who are sentenced to ignition interlock usage to report to the state when they have acquired the devices.

Laura Dean-Mooney, president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, is urging Kansas lawmakers to to eliminate that amendment.

According to a report in the Wichita Eagle, Senator Mary Pilher Cook offered the amendment because one of her constituents informed her that they were ordered to use the ignition interlock device for a year, but could not, because they didn’t actually own a car.

“I don’t want people to drive drunk,” Cook, a Shawnee Republican, told the press. “I want our roads to be safe; I just want to find a solution for everybody.”

Lance Kinzer, Kansas House Judiciary Committee Chairman believes the amendment will be either removed, or at least altered, when his members analyze it during the coming week.

Under current Kansas law, motorists convicted of a second DUI, who refuse a breathalyzer, or who are caught with a 0.15 blood alchohol level (the legal limit is 0.08) must use the interlock device for a year or more. The devices cost $50-$70 to install and then there are $65-$75/month in fees. After installatation, the company that provided the device notifies the state, and the actual sentence begins.

The problem is that compliance has been low since the notification requirement began in July, 2006. because many drivers chose to risk getting pulled over, and didn’t bother installing the interlocks at all.

Kansas House Assistant Minority Leader, Rep Jim Ward (D-Wichita), a member of the House Judiciary Committee said he thought the DUI Commission should review the amendment before it gets added to any bill. The commission is currently engaged in a comprehensive overhaul of the state’s drunk driving laws.

Ward told the press, “There are a few … people without a vehicle, but they are very few. We don’t want to throw the baby and the bathwater out.”

Toyota Corolla Designated Top Safety Pick by IIHS

Posted & filed under Auto Safety.

Despite the fact that Toyota is taking a lot of heat for not addressing the gas pedal problems in its vehicles that resulted in many accidents and injuries, there is some positive safety news about the Japanese automaker. According to IIHS, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, both the Scion xB and the Toyota Corolla have earned the safety organization’s designation as Top Safety Picks.

To qualify as a Top Safety Pick, vehicles must earn a rating of “good” – the highest rating possible – in the front, side, rollover and rear-impact crash tests run by the Insititute, and they must also be equipped with electronic stability control. The Corolla and xB are the first Toyota models to earn such a designation, since the required criteria were tightened by the Institute, with the addition of the new rollover test this year.

The specifics behind a “good” rollover rating are that the vehicle’s roof must support the equivalent of four times the vehicle’s weight (as compared with the current Federal standard of only 1.5 times the weight), said a representative of the IIHS. In the Institute’s test, the Corolla’s roof supported 5.1 times the car’s weight, while the xB’s roof withstood a force equal to 6.8 times the car’s weight.

Institute president Adrian Lund told the press, “Top Safety Pick recognizes the vehicles that afford buyers the best overall protection in common crashes. With more top performers, there’s no reason to buy a small car with less than stellar crash test ratings.”

Both the xB and the Corolla also earned the 2009 Top Safety Pick award.