At-Fault Drivers from Out of Town To Be Billed for Collisions

Amber Wheat
Contributor
(866) 735-1102 Ext 578
Visit Amber Wheat on FacebookVisit Amber Wheat on LinkedIn
Posted by Amber WheatApril 14, 2009 3:11 PM

Some cities and counties in California are thinking about trying a new way to recoup their funds after a collision. If the at-fault driver is from outside the area, they will be billed for the services provided.

There are many different arguments against the new policies. Insurers say they oppose the charges because they will ultimately foot the bill. Of course, we know that is not true, especially in a policy limits situation. The insured will receive less compensation if the bill is paid by the insurance company.

Many local government agencies defend the idea by saying that only people from out of town will be charged. The idea is that people who live within the district have already paid for the public services through taxes. My response is that the people who live outside the city pay taxes too. Just because they haven't had to use them in their city, doesn't mean that they don't pay for them.

Many are worried that these fees will become an "accident tax" and they liken this policy to a speed trap. Speed traps in California are illegal based on the possibility of human error. This fee for collisions could have greater implications. Will law enforcement skew events or misinterpret statements to put out-of-town drivers at fault if it means they are allowed to assauge some of their costs? They may not do so on purpose, but it could be a factor in their decision.

If cities and counties decide to go through with this, they risk a decrease in tourism and an increase in hit-and-runs. Proponents say that it is not a revenue generator, but it kind of is. The police and fire department are given funds to operate. They spend those funds when they get called out to collision scenes. That is the way it is supposed to be. If they need more money to do their jobs then it needs to come from taxes and the funds dispersed by the local governments, not from individuals.

Another system they are considering is to "just bill insurance companies." But that is a mistake as it will only make the insurance premiums go up and it will be subtracted from what the parties recover. It is not fair to anyone.

What do you think? Florida already has this in place, but there is current legislation to repeal it. Does it work? Is it fair? Would you avoid areas if you knew they had this policy? Tell me what you think.

0 Comments

Have an opinion about this post? Please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Comments for this article are closed.

Subscribe to InjuryBoard Sacramento

InjuryBoard Sacramento RSS Feeds

Keep up with the latest updates using your favorite RSS reader

Injury Board Sacramento is brought to you by Demas & Rosenthal, LLP

Legal Assistance Center

More Info
Demas & Rosenthal, LLP (866) 735-1102 Ext 575 www.injury-attorneys.com/
google
Personal Injury Lawyers Serving: Sacramento, West Sacramento, Chico, Folsom, Rocklin, Roseville, Woodland, South Lake Tahoe, Paradise, Yuba City, Collusa, Corning, Grass Valley, Linda, Live Oak, Magalia, Marysville, Nevada City, Oroville, Red Bluff, Ukiah, Willows, Amador County, Auburn, Citrus Heights, Davis, Elk Grove, Galt, Lodi, Stockton, Jackson, Ione, Lincoln, Placerville, Truckee, Vacaville, Fairfield, all surrounding areas
701 Howe AveSuite A-1, Sacramento , California 95825 [ Show Map ]
Better Business Bureau Accredited Business Confidential

Your question will be referred to an attorney near you. If your question is of a legal nature, then by submitting this form you agree you are not forming a formal attorney / client relationship. Read our full privacy policy.

Looking for an InjuryBoard attorney closer to home? Click here.

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Enter your email address if you would like to receive email notifications when comments are made on this post.

Email address