Is California Prop 213 Fair?
by, 08-27-2012 at 07:58 PM (951 Views)
Passed in 1996, California Proposition 213 limits the amount of damages a no-fault driver can receive from the other insured if they did not have insurance at the time of a car accident. More specifically, a no-fault party without insurance can only receive economic damages from the accident. Economic damages include medical bills, loss earnings and property damage. The driver however may not recover for non-economic damages. These damages include pain and suffering and lost earnings capacity.
There are certain limitations to the scope of Prop 213 however. Drivers driving under the influence of drugs and alcohol may not assert the defense of prop 213. Furthermore, prop 213 does not apply to minors or situations where wrongful death occurred.
Is It Fair?
Prop 213 was passed through an initiative proposed by insurance companies in order to save money. And, while the purpose of prop 213 is to punish individuals without insurance, all it really does is shift the responsibility of the car accident from the almighty car insurance companies to individuals who often times cannot afford to pay for themselves.
The fact of the matter is that most people are not even aware that Prop. 213 exists, and even if they did, would surely not be compelled to procure insurance if they otherwise had not planned to do so. Instead, the cost of these damages will be shifted to the American taxpayer, instead of where is should be, the insurance conglomerates. This is just another clear example of insurance companies using there might to fool voters into believing that this initiative benefits the American people.
When reviewing legal issues, it's important to view all sides of an issue, and especially to have experts involved in the analysis. For this reason, if you have a concern, or specifically a legal issue with regards to a car accident or other issue which touches on California Prop 213, you should consider hiring a qualified attorney to represent you.