Random insurance proof

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? OHIO

I'm looking for Ohio case law challenging O.R.C. 4509.101(A)3c, random verification by mail for proof of insurance automobile coverage?What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

Good luck with that. You should look into subscribing to Westlaw.

So I am guessing your *random* insurance proof request is not something that you can produce....because let's guess, you have no insurance?

is your vehicle still (illegally) registered in Canada?

No, Tammy8. I have the proof of insurance sitting on my desk in their envelope ready to mail. This is Ohio, USA, not Canada, and yes it is registered with legal plates, my good friend justalayman.

I object in principal to random searches by mail. This can be a slippery slope if we are not all careful.

timotb said:

No, Tammy8. I have the proof of insurance sitting on my desk in their envelope ready to mail. This is Ohio, USA, not Canada, and yes it is registered with legal plates, my good friend justalayman.

I object in principal to random searches by mail. This can be a slippery slope if we are not all careful.

Click to expand...

Isn't this something you agreed to when you either signed for your OH driver license or vehicle plates?

I got hit several times with the random insurance check in five years. I suppose it evens out because many people I know never got it. Fortunately I have a good insurance company and all I did is call them and they make their computers mail out the notice to the state for me.

I object in principal to random searches by mail.

Click to expand...

Its not a search, its a question and its one of the least intrusive ways to track down people who illegally drive without insurance.

The states have tried requiring insurance at the time of registration, but criminals routinely will purchase insurance, get their registration and then cancel their insurance within days.

The other option is far more intrusive from a privacy standpoint,that is for insurers to report adds and drops in coverage to all vehicles in the state. Thats a far more costly option than spot checking by mail. Unfortunately its what is bound to happen since a significant portion of the populace (about 10% in IN) is driving without insurance.

And you have one too may digits in there. It's: 4509.101 (A) (3) (c)

Since the concept of random selection of drivers for complaince checks is a part of the law, and because the law is worded as a requirement for people who registered vehicles, it would seem on its face to be constitutional. This is based on the concept that registering a vehicle is not a right guaranteed in the constitution. This is very similar to the rules on consent for breathalyzers at DUI stops - whereby getting a drivers license gives your implied consent to blood/breathalyzer tests.

I for one would be glad if my state did this - at least they would be making an effort to find and fine uninsured drivers BEFORE one of them hit me...

Some Random Guy said:

The other option is far more intrusive from a privacy standpoint,that is for insurers to report adds and drops in coverage to all vehicles in the state. That's a far more costly option than spot checking by mail.

Click to expand...

New York does this, and quite sensibly.

I am at a loss to see how individual mailing, handled by the consumer and then manually entered by the insurance department, is more cost effective than a computerized file that every insurer is already creating.

So 100% compliance vs. at best a random spot check of a small percent of motorists.

and

Costly slow paperwork and workers to type in paper responses risking errors vs. instantaneous computers using batch files already produced by every carrier...

Spot checks makes perfect sense.

timotb said:

No, Tammy8. I have the proof of insurance sitting on my desk in their envelope ready to mail. This is Ohio, USA, not Canada, and yes it is registered with legal plates, my good friend justalayman.

I object in principal to random searches by mail. This can be a slippery slope if we are not all careful.

Click to expand...

in a previous thread, you said you had an Ohio license and residency but your car was titled and registered in Canada. Just wondering if that had changed.

timotb


Ontario Registration, Ohio License

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio

I need to learn the legality of Driving a Canadian titled and registered vehicle here in Ohio on an Ohio Drivers License with proper insurance.

I cant convert either registration or license. What violations if any could I be cited for here in Ohio. Details please.

Click to expand...

and demanding you provide proof of insurance, via USPS, is not a search. I suspect the Ohio laws allow the state to verify insurance coverage at any time in this manner.

I find it interesting Texas is ahead of Ohio in verifying car insurance. Texas is not normally ahead on much of anything. Well, except for beer drinking and tailgate parties.

A year or so ago Texas created an insurance vehicle verification database http://www.texassure.com/ in hopes of catching and removing uninsured drivers from Texas roads. One in five cars on the road do not have insurance. That's not counting the underinsured.

Law enforcement and county tax officials have access to the database. When I renew my driver's license, do my annual car registration, or even get stopped while driving this database is checked. The downside is there doesn't seem to be much in the way of punishment. San Antonio tows all uninsured vehicles. If they would make towing a state-wide mandate there just might be fewer uninsured cars on the road.

I applaud any state that takes a proactive stance against uninsured drivers.

justalayman, the canada threads are about something totally old and different. somerandomguy, I fixed the extra digit.

Now more to the point, I say it is a search, and a response requires a stamp to return it (they didnt even provide a paid envelope.)

I'm still looking for specific Ohio cases challenging the matter, not lectures in favor. I understand their reasoning and agree that drivers should all carry insurance......but I still object to random search by mail.

This can be a slippery slope if we are not all careful.

timotb said:

justalayman, the canada threads are about something totally old and different. somerandomguy, I fixed the extra digit.

Now more to the point, I say it is a search, and a response requires a stamp to return it (they didnt even provide a paid envelope.)

I'm still looking for specific Ohio cases challenging the matter, not lectures in favor. I understand their reasoning and agree that drivers should all carry insurance......but I still object to random search by mail.

This can be a slippery slope if we are not all careful.

Click to expand...

This is NOT a search and this is NOT a slippery slope. You are required to have insurance. There is nothing wrong with the state verifying that.

xylene said:

New York does this, and quite sensibly.

I am at a loss to see how individual mailing, handled by the consumer and then manually entered by the insurance department, is more cost effective than a computerized file that every insurer is already creating.

Click to expand...

As an IT professional experienced in fortune 500 database and integration projects, I wholeheartedly agree that it could be done far cheaper using an electronic process. However, since I am also familiar with government procurement and big business inefficiencies, I doubt that any of those cost savings are being realized.

The only reason that I was talking down about the computerized version of insurance compliance was that it provided more data to the government and was therefore more of a privacy concern than than the current Ohio method.