California Prop 213 and Its Impact on Car Accidents

Proposition 213 was created in 1996, as a way to encourage motorists to get and maintain insurance. The goal of this proposition was to prevent uninsured motorists and drunk drivers from collecting damages from those who are driving lawfully. The proposition was a ballot initiative that became effective November 6, 1996.

What is the California Proposition 213?

Proposition 213 prevents uninsured drivers from collecting non-economic damages (like pain and suffering) in a lawsuit. This applies even if they were not at fault in the accident. They are however, still able to collect economic damages like medical expenses, property and lost wages. The end result is that for someone driving without insurance, their rights are limited in terms of the ability to sue to regain damages.

This proposition also limits the rights to collect non-economic damages for drunk drivers or drivers who are impaired by other substances and convicted felons who are injured while committing a crime or fleeing the scene of a crime.

How Did Proposition 213 Start?

Proposition 213 was started by the car insurance industry, who asserted that the costs associated with accidents by uninsured drivers were causing insurance to rise for insured drivers. The proposition was supported by a number of groups, including Mothers Against Drunk Driving, the California Police Chiefs Association and the California Association of Highway Patrolman.

The rationale is to promote insurance, reward those who carry insurance and provide a deterrent to uninsured drivers, drivers with DUIs and felons.

How Proposition 213 Works and Who It Affects?

Prop 213 works by restricting the kinds of damages an uninsured or drunk driver can claim if they are in an accident, even if it was not their fault. An uninsured motorist cannot collect non-economic damages which includes compensation for pain and suffering, disability, emotional distress, loss of companionship, and more. They can however collect economic damages which can include medical expenses, lost wages, lost earning capacity, costs for long-term care or rehabilitation, property damage and more.

Proposition 213 affects injured motorists who were driving without insurance for the vehicle at the time of their accident.

One of the effects of proposition 213 has been that car insurance companies have gradually lowered their rates. In 1998, two years after the proposition passed, Mercury Insurance Co. reduced its rates by 6.4%.

The restrictions that are imposed by proposition 213 also has the effect of discouraging drunk driving. Even if a motorist has insurance, once they have been convicted of driving under the influence (DUI), the damages they can collect are limited. This part is seen as quite important as even an uninsured driver in an accident with a drunk driver is not as restricted in what they are allowed to claim in comparison to the driver with a DUI.

Exceptions to Proposition 213

There are a few exceptions to be aware of if you have gotten into an accident and the vehicle was not insured. They are listed below; proposition 213 does not apply to the following situations:

• You were driving your employer’s uninsured vehicle

• You were driving an uninsured vehicle, but have insurance of your own for your vehicle

• The accident was on private property

• You were a passenger in an uninsured vehicle

• You are uninsured but the driver who caused the accident was drunk or under the influence or a felon in the middle of a crime or fleeing the scene

• The accident and subsequent injury were due to product liability

Drawbacks of Prop 213

Proposition 213 is black-and-white legislation that does not allow for “grey area” cases. Due process is ignored and cases are not given the chance to be tried in a court of law.

While proposition 213 restricts the non-economic damage that drivers under the influence and felons can receive, it also limits the claims that uninsured motorists can receive. Though insurance is mandatory, putting these three classes of drivers together is not necessarily fair as it punishes those without insurance to the same degree as a drunk driver or felon. It also fails to consider that some people may not be uninsured by choice. If someone does not have enough financial security to maintain shelter or food, stopping insurance can be the difference between making this month’s rent or not. The idea of taking public transportation could be a solution but it may not run at all hours, frequently enough, can take a very long time and may not get someone close enough to their workplace and an individual may need to make a difficult decision to keep themselves and their family housed and fed.

How Can Personal Injury Lawyers Help?

Like a lot of legal situations, it can be difficult to assess how a law applies to a particular situation and it may be hard for an individual to determine if they fall into an exemption category. Lawyers can help in a few ways.

A personal injury lawyer can decide if proposition 213 applies to a situation by looking at the individual’s insurance status and other elements of the accident to see if they qualify for a trial or if they might need help in determining what they are entitled to. An example could be that an employee is driving and the company’s car is not insured, but they have their own personal insurance for their vehicle. In a case like this, proposition 213 would not apply for two reasons: they have their own insurance, and the responsibility is the employer’s so the employee is not responsible for carrying insurance on the company car.

It can be hard to tell if an exemption applies, and consulting a lawyer can make that clear. Though this article lists a few exemptions, is it not a substitute for legal advice and having a lawyer thoroughly understand the situation can also help to maximize the recovery of damages. Even in cases where proposition 213 applies, a lawyer is knowledgeable of the economic damages you can recover and will make sure that there are no missed opportunities to claim, especially with damages that may not be obvious like future medical costs or diminished earning capacity.

A lawyer is capable of negotiating settlements with insurance companies or other drivers to get fair compensation for the injuries sustained. There may also be cases where a lawyer can challenge prop 213 if they have substantial reason to think that it does not apply to this particular situation. Overall, the legal landscape can be difficult to navigate by someone unfamiliar with the process and having a lawyer to consult can increase compensation even if the case does not seem like a strong one.

At Shiganian Law, we understand that accidents rarely occur without cause. When someone else's negligence disrupts your life, we are here to help you secure the compensation you deserve.

Frequently Asked Questions

How Prop 213 Limits Recovery in Car Accidents

If a driver does not have insurance and gets into an accident, they will not be able to recover non-economic losses, even if the accident was not their fault. However, there are other losses that can be claimed and it is important to have a lawyer assess what you might be entitled to. The severity of the injury can factor into economic losses but not non-economic losses like loss of enjoyment of life or emotional distress.

If a driver is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, they are also going to be restricted in what they can claim. Like the uninsured driver, they can claim for economic damages but not non-economic ones. If the driver is convicted of a DUI and they were not the one to have caused the accident, they are still not entitled to any non-economic compensation.

What is Recoverable According to Proposition 213 in California?

Economic damages are usually not restricted when driving without insurance or under the influence. These include medical expenses (now and future), lost wages (now and future), loss of earning capacity, property damage, and other expenses that are easy to quantify like costs of home care, transportation, disability accommodations and more.

Non-economic damages are limited by prop 213. This means a driver that is not exempt from proposition 213 typically will not be able to recover compensation for pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life, and loss of consortium.

As every situation is unique, consulting a lawyer can help maximize compensation for an injury.

How Does it Impact Uninsured Drivers?

The main impact is the restriction on getting compensation for non-economic losses. Whether at fault or not, what can be recovered is generally limited to economic losses, which are more tangible and able to be clearly associated with a cost.

There are exceptions, and if the situation and driver fall into one of the exempt categories, they will be able to claim both economic and non-economic losses. Those who have cases that are exempt may be a passenger, or may not be on public roads, or if the other party that caused the accident was a felon committing or fleeing a crime.

The overall intention was to encourage getting and maintaining mandatory insurance, even if it only covers the minimum requirements. Proposition 213 is meant to discourage driving without insurance by limiting what can be financially recouped by someone in this position.