If it is state backed, how does this statement make sense: “…doesn’t cost the taxpayers a dime…”? How is this possible? And if is, who actually pays for it?
Another case of elitist thinking on the Gernators part. Does he not have any awareness of what people on the low end of the financial spectrum are going through? Shame on him. On the front line I would rather see someone with some basic coverage than going bare due to cost.
This program is run through the Assigned Risk Program, which means every auto insurance carrier participates. The $350 annual cost does not include Med Pay or UM/UIM coverage. The limits under this program are only 10/20/3, while not technically meeting the state’s financial responsibility law, are recognized as such. No taxpayer money is involved in this program.
Why is ok for lower limits than the statutory limits ok? So I get this right – we have one set up laws for “regular” fold and another set of laws for folks on hardship. This is the same approach that rewards those companies that did the wrong thing. There are laws and everyone should follow equally! If they carry the coverage they need to have minimum required limits like the rest of us citizens that struggle every day!
If you can’t afford the insurance don’t drive! The Unemployement rate is high but a good percentage of those folks are enjoying the free unemployement money. I know of few folks that are milking it instead of looking for a job. Jobs are out there, just need to go get one.
Assigned Risk? I get it. Doesn’t cost the “taxpayers” just the people who buy auto insurance. I always hated the concept that “the rich keep getting richer” but now I understand why. Soon we’ll have a small minority of people paying for everybody else. Those rich people better keep getting richer – they’re paying for everybody!
Typically people who qualify for the assigned risk program can find “normal” insurance at the state minimum for a mere 2-3 bucks more a month. Assigned risk program sounds and looks good a lot more then it actually helps anyone
first of all, the state would like all insured’s to carry 30/60, but can carry lower limits of 15/30, but that requires a signed form. um/uim coverages can be rejected in writing as well. min pd limits are already at 5. to me that is ridiculous coverage, 15/30/5. too many cars easily exceed 5g’s, even used cars!
i agree, sounds like a double negative when it says it does not cost the taxpayer a dime! yet, the state had offered at least til next year a state plan that folks can enter into. problem, is that if you can’t afford insurance, then you don’t need a car. you can use mass transit. don’t spend all your money on the lottery in hopes to win millions. california is already heading to bankruptcy!
wow… again with the valid points followed by coded language. “don’t spend all your money on the lottery in hopes to win millions”. sorry, but not all poor people spend their money on the lottery. then again, you are wrong about the option form for less than 30/60 BI… if you want 15/30 in CA, you do not need to sign a form… the option form only applies to UM
the coverage on these policies is only 10/20/3. It’s pitiful coverage, almost always not enough to cover the damage. Claims with these policies often are protracted trying to settle property damage claims on a prorata basis.
this program was started 9 years ago due to 2 state senators trying to address the uninsured motorist problem in CA. One of the state senators at the time was Jackie Speier whose husband was killed by an uninsured driver. For many people it is the only option they have to be legal on the road….and some people have no other choice but to drive to work, to the doctor…..not everyone lives near mass transit…
I actually staffed AB 725 for Assemblymember Dave Jones. I would love to speak with anyone who may have suggestions on how to improve the Low-Cost Auto program.
Please give me a call at (916)319-2009 between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. PST, Monday through Friday. I would like to hear what you have to say. Thank you and I hope to hear from many of you soon.
One more reason why the state of California is bankrupt…..subsidizing personal auto insurance premiums?
I personally choose to live elsewhere, where the “cost of living” including car insurance, is “affordable”…..
If you can’t afford car insurance, don’t have a car. If you can’t afford living in California, move on to another state.
If it is state backed, how does this statement make sense: “…doesn’t cost the taxpayers a dime…”? How is this possible? And if is, who actually pays for it?
Another case of elitist thinking on the Gernators part. Does he not have any awareness of what people on the low end of the financial spectrum are going through? Shame on him. On the front line I would rather see someone with some basic coverage than going bare due to cost.
This program is run through the Assigned Risk Program, which means every auto insurance carrier participates. The $350 annual cost does not include Med Pay or UM/UIM coverage. The limits under this program are only 10/20/3, while not technically meeting the state’s financial responsibility law, are recognized as such. No taxpayer money is involved in this program.
Why is ok for lower limits than the statutory limits ok? So I get this right – we have one set up laws for “regular” fold and another set of laws for folks on hardship. This is the same approach that rewards those companies that did the wrong thing. There are laws and everyone should follow equally! If they carry the coverage they need to have minimum required limits like the rest of us citizens that struggle every day!
If you can’t afford the insurance don’t drive! The Unemployement rate is high but a good percentage of those folks are enjoying the free unemployement money. I know of few folks that are milking it instead of looking for a job. Jobs are out there, just need to go get one.
Assigned Risk? I get it. Doesn’t cost the “taxpayers” just the people who buy auto insurance. I always hated the concept that “the rich keep getting richer” but now I understand why. Soon we’ll have a small minority of people paying for everybody else. Those rich people better keep getting richer – they’re paying for everybody!
Typically people who qualify for the assigned risk program can find “normal” insurance at the state minimum for a mere 2-3 bucks more a month. Assigned risk program sounds and looks good a lot more then it actually helps anyone
I think the program pays 10% commission and brokers can’t charge fees. Is any producer really able to cover his/her costs selling a policy for a
Sorry!
To the point, is any producer covering their costs with the commissions of $40 or less?
Another question – how many policies outside of LA have been sold? Not many. Why not call this the LA Subsidy Program?
first of all, the state would like all insured’s to carry 30/60, but can carry lower limits of 15/30, but that requires a signed form. um/uim coverages can be rejected in writing as well. min pd limits are already at 5. to me that is ridiculous coverage, 15/30/5. too many cars easily exceed 5g’s, even used cars!
i agree, sounds like a double negative when it says it does not cost the taxpayer a dime! yet, the state had offered at least til next year a state plan that folks can enter into. problem, is that if you can’t afford insurance, then you don’t need a car. you can use mass transit. don’t spend all your money on the lottery in hopes to win millions. california is already heading to bankruptcy!
wow… again with the valid points followed by coded language. “don’t spend all your money on the lottery in hopes to win millions”. sorry, but not all poor people spend their money on the lottery. then again, you are wrong about the option form for less than 30/60 BI… if you want 15/30 in CA, you do not need to sign a form… the option form only applies to UM
with our company they are required!
the coverage on these policies is only 10/20/3. It’s pitiful coverage, almost always not enough to cover the damage. Claims with these policies often are protracted trying to settle property damage claims on a prorata basis.
this program was started 9 years ago due to 2 state senators trying to address the uninsured motorist problem in CA. One of the state senators at the time was Jackie Speier whose husband was killed by an uninsured driver. For many people it is the only option they have to be legal on the road….and some people have no other choice but to drive to work, to the doctor…..not everyone lives near mass transit…
Hello Everyone —
I actually staffed AB 725 for Assemblymember Dave Jones. I would love to speak with anyone who may have suggestions on how to improve the Low-Cost Auto program.
Please give me a call at (916)319-2009 between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. PST, Monday through Friday. I would like to hear what you have to say. Thank you and I hope to hear from many of you soon.
Best,
Max Reyes