Question about mandated insurance rates

[DumbDrunk]

I thought I'd get another discussion going.

I understand the requirement for someone convicted of DUI to carry liability insurance for a few years; (obvious)

I understand the need for notification of the DUI to insurance companies, since a carrier could possibly wiggle out of paying a claim for a 3rd party if it was never informed that its insured had a DUI;

I understand the need to require affirmative notification to the state by the insurance carrier that the person is covered. (again, obvious).

I don't understand mandated rates. If the goal is to make the DUI more painful, then levy an additional fine payable over 2-3 years (the length of the SR-22). These 'mandated rates' seem like a good ole boy deal between state legislatures and insurance companies. Why shouldn't companies be able to compete..if they want to offer a person with a DUI a decent rate (based on an otherwise clean record, for example) why shouldn't they be able to?

I figure there must be a rational reason besides my insurance company political deal theory.

Thoughts?

[BigMistakeFl]

I could be wrong but, I believe SR-22 insurance is only required if the driver had no insurance coverage at the time of his or her DUI arrest. Regular liability insurance does go up considerably after such an arrest, but you don't have to pick up the SR-22 if you were fully covered at the time of the arrest.

[JETX]

Originally Posted by DumbDrunk

I thought I'd get another discussion going.

Sorry, but this site is not for theoretical 'discussions'.
If you have a valid legal QUESTION, ask it.
If you want a debate, go to: [url]www.WeDebateCrap.com[/url]

[DumbDrunk]

Originally Posted by JETX

Sorry, but this site is not for theoretical 'discussions'.
If you have a valid legal QUESTION, ask it.
If you want a debate, go to: [url]www.WeDebateCrap.com[/url]

Wow. Sorry to apparently break board rules, but is that really a call to be such an a#@?

If you are a Mod, then perhaps a 'Hey, sorry, but no open ended topics are allowed' post would have sufficed.

Just a thought.

That said, cool. If that is the rule, I'll stick with it.