What are CA Auto Insurance Law regarding Judgements

by Guest » Sat Aug 28, 2010 11:55 pm
Guest

Thought I'd call a lawyer but want to find infomation first. Here is a simple overview....My car insurance was due Jan 23rd. Payment was mailed Jan 20th along with voided check stub from checking account information. I had an accident Jan 26th in which I was found at fault and the claim was turned over to my auto insurance for payment. My ins. company states that from the 23rd thru the 26th I was not covered. They state they received payment in their office on the 27th but cannot produce the envelope with date stamp on it. They did not process the payment untill Feb 2nd and the payment check did not clear the bank until Feb 17th . YET, they processed my checking account information and made auto payment for Feb insurance coverage on Feb 2. Following these two payments the insurance company reinstated the insurance policy and backdated it to Jan 27th leaving me uncovered from Jan 23 thru Jan 26th conviently not covering date of accident. No credit was ever given, the premium was never pro-rated, and all subsequent payments were paid infull and processed. I recently learned they have since obtained a "judgment" against me and suspended my driver's license. I would like to know what recourse I can take to restore my license and driver rating considering all payments were made in full and in good faith.

Total Comments: 3

Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 02:15 am Post Subject:

First thing you need to do is file a complaint with the CA Dept of Insurance. They are extremely strict with insurance companies and will look into the matter for you. An attorney is not going to get the time of day from the carrier unless he/she files suit... and you'd need to pay the attorney a boat load of money to handle this for you.

Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:16 pm Post Subject:

Couple of things...first off it was due the 23rd but you didn't put it into the mail till the 20th, so lets assume it didn't even go out till the 21st...how far did it have to go? Even across town could take more than 2 days...

Why are you just now (eight months later), wondering about this? I'm sure they denied your claim in writing correct?

T is right, file a complaint with CA's DOI, but sounds to me like your carrier most likely has done nothing wrong...sorry

Posted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 02:52 pm Post Subject:

I recently learned they have since obtained a "judgment" against me and suspended my driver's license.



I would be the first one to support you if all is as you say it was, but, in addition to all your other assertions that I am very skeptical about, this one, in particular, makes no sense to me at all.

First, no insurance company in California has the ability to suspend someone's driver license, only the DMV or a court may do that (the CA Vehicle Code allows a police officer or deputy sheriff may "confiscate" one's license on the spot for failure to show proof of insurance/financial responsibility -- few do unless you are guilty of "contempt of cop" -- i.e., a very bad attitude after being stopped).

Second, on what basis would your insurance company obtain a "judgment" against you . . . not paying premiums? You cannot be forced to pay premiums, so what other money did you owe them and did not repay? None? Then how/why could they sue you?

And even if they could, it would not happen without your knowledge -- that is, if you were being sued (the only path to a judgment), you have to be properly served, be given time to respond to the initial civil complaint, and be allowed to be represented in court (by an attorney or in pro per). So something is either very wrong or very much missing from the information you have posted.

As for the timing of your payment and the lapse in coverage, I think you've left out some very important information, too, as it concerns "JAN 23". And I will explain my reasoning.

Auto insurance in California comes with a minimum 10 day grace period. Most insurers do not offer more than the required 10 days. If your policy's premium due date was Jan 23, there is no way you would have had a lapse from 1/23 to 1/26. Your premium payment, received on or before February 2 (another date you mentioned with specificity) would have made your coverage continuous without a lapse from January 23.

So here's what I believe is true, and why you have no reason to be "pissed" at anyone other than yourself.

1) Your actual policy expiration date was January 13, and your notice of lapse indicated that the policy would expire on January 23 if payment was NOT RECEIVED ON OR BEFORE THAT DATE (January 23, 2010 was a Saturday -- so mailing on January 20 was a bit ill-advised, and I would be willing to bet you have no independent proof of mailing, such as the form you can pay about $1.50 for at the Post Office when you give them the envelope).

2) You unwisely chose to mail a payment instead of going online to the insurer's website and making your payment on or before January 23, thus preventing the lapse (could it be that there would not have been enough money in your checking account to make the payment on that date?) Your payment would have been credited immediately.

2a) Even more unwisely, you chose not to use your insurer's automatic ACH payment plan that would have avoided all such problems, and probably would have avoided the extra fees for not paying your annual premium with one check.

3) Because of the required electronic reporting of policy lapses/renewals/new policies, your insurer sent notice of the lapse, as required, to the DMV on January 25 or January 26 (since 1/23 and 1/24 were weekend days).

However, the DMV does not automatically suspend one's driver license when it receives a first notice of lapse/nonrenewal. What they might do instead is send you a letter indicating that you have 120 days to provide new proof of financial responsibility/insurance. If they don't get it, then your license may be suspended without additional notice to you.

Has absolutely nothing to do with a "judgment." In fact, if a person is ever sent that 120-day notice, the Vehicle Code allows the DMV to suspend a driver license IMMEDIATELY in the future if the person is ever reported again as having allowed their insurance to lapse. Then it's time for an SR22 filing if you did not have continuous insurance coverage.

But here's the reality, also. That 120-day notice does not go out for up to 30 days after a first report of lapse. You might already have obtained new insurance and that electronic report to the DMV is supposed to be filed within 10 days. So they give you time to allow for things beyond your control.

With regard to a driver license suspension, the DMV is not perfect, and I suppose it's possible that your matter is the one that fell through the crack, and your license was inadvertently suspended improperly. Simply showing proof of insurance on the date in question at any DMV office would cure the suspension -- no need to file an SR22 at all. And no need to be "pissed".

So what I think is correct is that there was a lot more going on here than what you have voluntarily stated. A little more clarity/honesty on your part might help.

It's easy to point a finger at an insurance company when you talk to your friends, but here, you're asking for help from persons who understand the industry far better than most of your friends.

You'll always get sympathy from your unknowledgeable friends. You'll always get sympathy from us here, too, when it is merited (notice, tcope advised you to contact the CDI -- www.insurance.ca.gov -- to file a complaint, if one is warranted, as I frequently do, too, and here I'm even giving you the link).

But you will be unmercilessly taken to task if your information is not complete, inaccurate, or a downright misrepresentation. So maybe you'd like to post a little more information to clear the air?

Add your comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.