Pursuant to Prop 213 which was approved in 1996, a uninsured motorist is limited in their recovery when involved in an automobile accident.
CALIFORNIA’S PROP 213, WHAT IS IT?
Proposition 213, which officially is called The Personal Responsibility Act of 1996, was brought to the voters in California. This initiative would limit the right for uninsured motorists
There were many organizations which were in support of Prop 213, including MADD, or Mothers Against Drunk Driving, Doris Tate Crimes Victims Bureau, Peace Officers Research Association of California, The California Police Chiefs Association, the Association for California Tort Reform, the CHP’s California Association of Highway Patrolmen, California Peace Officers’ Association.
There are many instances where clients contact our offices and are distraught learning about this law and claiming that the law is not just. This law, regardless of whether or not it is just, is an existing law, and it prevents drivers who do not have the proper legal liability coverage from obtaining pain and suffering due to their actions that were negligent on the roadways. This applies to any vehicle type, vans, buses, and even trucks.
THE PURPOSE OF PROPOSITION 213 ACCORDING TO THE INITIATIVE
The first reason mentioned for Prop 213 is that the cost for car insurance have skyrocketed in California. This law would help avoid offenders from being awarded for their irresponsibility and for breaking the law.
However, under the current regulations, the uninsured party can recover damages that are unreasonable from citizens that are abiding by the law. These damages may be limited, nonetheless not entirely precluded.
The second reason is that the system would stop irresponsible offenders from being able to seek unreasonable damages by suing law abiding citizens.
This law would be a measure to restore the balance for the justice system to limit the right for uninsured parties.
Prior to this law, ANYONE that was injured as a result of an accident could sue the person, government, or business responsible so that they would be able to recover any losses. These losses include economic losses, which could be medical expenses, property damage, or lost wages, and losses that are not economical, for example, pain and suffering.
Proposition 213 does not allow for the recovery of losses that are non-economic for specific accidents.
The compensation is only restricted by non-economic damages that happen in a car accident by Prop 213. This includes losses from disfigurement, emotional or mental distress, pain and suffering, inconvenience, and physical impairment. Economic damages are still offered to accident victims that are affected by Prop 213. This would include things such as rehabilitation costs, future medical expenses, missed work meaning lost wages, and repairs to property or vehicles.
Prop 213 primarily affects uninsured motorist seeking recovery. If at the time of an accident you are not insured nor is the vehicle that you are driving, in your case Prop 213 may apply. As we mentioned above, this will deny you being able to get compensated for any damages that are not economic. No matter if you have a reason to believe that the vehicle being driven is insured.
Drivers under the influence of alcohol or drugs, also known as DUI, are also a vital part of those who are affected by Prop 213. In a case where a driver did not cause the accident at the time but had been driving under the influence, it may cause the law to prevent them from collecting any damages for pain and suffering, as well as any other non-economic compensation. An important thing to note is that this has to do with both victims of DUI car accidents and those that cause them.
There are specific narrow exceptions for Prop 213 which would permit recovery of all the damages that you are entitled to, whether or not you were insured when the accident occurred or if the vehicle that was being driven was insured or not.
Exception 1 is if the vehicle that you were driving was owned by your employer and it was not insured, then you might be able to still seek out non-economic damages for the accident injury. This can even apply if when the accident happened, you were not insured.
Exception 2 applies if the accident occurred on private property. In these instances the uninsured party may be able to obtain all the compensation. This is because of the state law requires that drivers have auto liability insurance to drive on the public roadways, but on private property, this is not a requirement.
Exception 3 applies if the uninsured driver is not the owner of the vehicle being driven, but you, the person driving, have another car that you have insurance on. This will make you exempt from Prop 213.
Your insurance allows for you to seek the complete compensation that generally you are entitled to have, even though the car you were driving was not insured.
IF I WAS NOT INSURED, SHOULD I PURSUE A PERSONAL INJURY CASE?
Just because you were not insured, does not mean that you do not have the right to get compensated after being injured in an accident that was caused by someone else’s negligence. There are exceptions to Prop 213, and even if in your case, Prop 213 applies, you are still entitled to recovery for your lost wages, medical bills, damages to any property, or any other economic losses that you may have suffered due to another person’s negligence. You should seek a free consultation from LA Law Group and schedule a free consultation with one of our award-winning injury attorneys from California.
At LA Law Group, our practice spans across all of California.. Our attorney’s have decades of experience and knowledge to fight for traffic collision victims. Take a
