Smart Auto Insurance Blog

New Jersey auto insurance consistently ranks as one of the highest states for auto insurance rates and regulators are looking to curb some of the rising costs through new regulations.  The article “What the New Car Insurance Rules Mean for NJ” found on NECN.com answers some of the top questions New Jersey residents have about how the new regulations will affect them.

New Jersey auto insurance is looking at a big overhaul from the proposed regulation changes for the personal injury protection component of auto insurance policies.  The changes will essentially change how and what physicians can charge for treatments and there will be a restructuring of the process for appealing a denied claim.  This is all in hopes that rising premiums will be slowed down and New Jersey auto insurance will become more affordable.

The article is very useful in answering questions many residents have.  It answers some details about personal injury protection and outlines why the system needs a makeover at this time.  The changes to medical services are discussed and gives an understanding of the changes being made to the approval and dispute process that New Jersey has long known.  Insurers will be benefiting from these changes in addition to the consumer so hopefully this encourages auto insurance companies to support the proposed changes and regulations are put into place quickly.  The regulations are not quite a done deal since the public has until the end of September to comment and a decision will be made at that time.

Alabama has been one of the leaders in uninsured motorists for years according to the press release found on OnlinePRNews.com.  Alabama auto insurance leaders and state lawmakers want to change this statistic and are pushing through legislation to reduce the rate of uninsured drivers throughout the state.

Alabama state law says that residents must have a liability policy in place if they want to legally drive an auto.  They are also required to carry proof of insurance with them in the car.  Even though there is a $500 fine for first time offenders, many drivers still choose to go uninsured.  The Insurance Research Council says that about 1 in 5 drivers in Alabama were uninsured in 2009.  To discourage this stat, lawmakers are trying to put in place an electronic auto insurance verification database which would match up policies with autos registered in the state allowing officials and the Department of Revenue to quickly determine whether or not a given car is insured.

In order to register your car you must check a box confirming you carry auto insurance for the car, but this database would actually verify this information rather than taking the driver at their word.  Obviously a handful of drivers are blatantly lying about this information so something needs to be put in place to prevent this from going on.  Hopefully this type of system will encourage more drivers to keep their policy valid and choose to be truthful on their registration application.

The Wisconsin Assembly is voting today on a bill which will eliminate some of the higher minimum levels for auto insurance that Democrats put in place back in 2009.  Wisconsin would still have to purchase Wisconsin auto insurance, but supporters say consumers will have lower auto insurance rates and more options to choose from if all goes as planned.

According to the article “Assembly Set to Roll Back Auto Insurance Levels” found on WTAQ.com, critics of the bill say accident victims could be left with a larger bill because their damages would be more than the person’s auto insurance policy coverage.  The bill would end some major consumer protections as well.  If would end “stacking” which is where a driver can use liability on up to 3 of their cars to claim damages when one car gets in an accident.

This bill would also bring back reducing clauses.  This measure reduces a policyholder’s benefits for drivers who are under-insured and high risk drivers would be placed into a class by themselves with high auto insurance rates than others.  The Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, supports the measure and it will be soon determined which way the vote will go.  Many states are facing similar decisions with their auto insurance laws, but Wisconsin is proactively trying to make changes.

Colorado regulators recently released their report which summarizes the Division of Insurance’s complaint handling activity from 2009-2010.  According to the article “Report: Regulators Recover $2.8M for Auto Insurance Policyholders” by PRWeb found on SFGate.com, the DOI’s mediation of about 5000 formal complaints during this time period led to the recovery of over $12 million for the state of Colorado’s insurance consumers.

$2.8 million of this sum are a result of complaints and protests filed against auto insurance companies operating in Colorado.  Colorado continues to receive the greatest proportion of consumer complaints filed with the DOI for the last 4 years.  Formal complaints and protests made against car coverage providers accounted for about 55% of the total.

Colorado allows policyholders to file complaints about disputes over issues with coverage.  Unlike most other states though, it has a separate category for protests against auto insurance companies which usually handle challenges against surcharges, policy cancellations, as well as coverage reductions.  Formal complaints have a high rate of confirmation while protests are much lower, so this can cause Colorado to have inflated numbers.  At any rate, Colorado auto insurance policy holders will get back some of what they lost from poor relations with their insurer.

According to the article “Insurance Changes Would Help 80% of Drivers” by Mike D’Arelli on sfgate.com, California auto insurance is about to see some major changes.  Thousands of auto insurance agents support Proposition 17 which will extend an auto insurance discount to millions of drivers in California who are forced to pay hundreds of dollars more every year for their auto insurance rates if they switch insurers.  It looks to reward good drivers and save them as much as $250/year.

Prop 17 plans to fix an underlying issue current in the auto insurance system.  Drivers who keep auto insurance with the same company are eligible for a continuous coverage discount.  If a consumer decides to switch carriers they do not get this benefit and Prop 17 will fix this flaw.  Drivers who follow the law and keep coverage continuously will still get the discount even if they change insurance companies.

Prop 17 will also increase competition among carriers and provide California drivers with many more options.  It will benefit up to 80% of drivers who keep continuous coverage.  It also contains some consumer protections to help those suffering from the economic downturn.  In addition, Prop 17 will protect our military men and women who are serving abroad and do not carry continuous coverage because they are not driving.  All of these provisions may seem like common sense, but it’s been the current law for awhile and it’s time for changes.  SR22 insurance will need to be still be carried by those high risk drivers who are required to carry this type of coverage.

Wisconsin is now requiring all drivers to carry auto insurance and with increased coverage, it could mean increased premiums.  According to the article “Auto Insurance Changes for June” by Kristin Crowley on fox11online.com the law that was meant to increase driver safety may backfire.

As coverages for Wisconsin auto insurance increases so will premium costs, which may cause more people to go without auto insurance.  This goes against the whole reason for the new law in the first place.  Wisconsin Insurance Alliance President Andy Franken states that about 14% of Wisconsin drivers are currently uninsured.

It is still to be determined how premiums will be affected by the new law, but one thing is for sure.  If you choose to drive without insurance it’s going to cost you.  The Wisconsin Department of Motor Vehicles states that driving without insurance will cost up to $500.  Even more expensive is fraudulent insurance issues which will be fines up to $5,000.

According to the article “AG Finds Herself on 2 Sides of a Dispute” by Bruce Mohl on boston.com, the Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley is defending something she criticized not too long ago.  She is the state’s top lawyer and is defending Governor Patrick’s Administration against a lawsuit that’s saying some of the state’s auto insurance rules unfairly favor national companies coming to the MA market, such as Progressive Auto Insurance. There has also been some criticism of the way Massachusetts auto insurance quotes are determined.

The interesting thing is that this same attorney general has been known to criticize the same regulations.  She has been a representative of consumers on auto insurance debates and released a report just before the holidays that stated her belief that the managed competition auto insurance system is not saving MA drivers money.  She also accused Governor Patrick of playing favorites when determining auto insurance rules.

She basically argued in court that state officials are acting reasonably in making the auto insurance rules, but just weeks ago accuses them of playing favorites. It will be interesting to see how this plays out and if her two-sided judgement affects her defense.

In a Boston Herald editorial, it’s said that auto body shops in Massachusetts are petitioning the state legislature for higher pay from insurers. They are asking that the state require a price floor; body shops would have to charge a minimum labor rate, and Massachusetts auto insurance providers would be required to pay no less than that minimum hourly rate for covered repairs.

The body shops claim that such legislation is necessary in order to keep up with inflation of their actual costs, and point out that their average rate is already under the national going rate for auto repairs (although insurance companies snap back that Mass. body shops also take more hours to fix a car than the national average, evening things out). Such a law would be likely to increase auto insurance premiums for consumers.