I have often believed uninsured drivers in South Dakota is a serious issue, usually costing taxpayers in court proceedings, insurance companies of insured drivers and victims of uninsured drivers. It cost my mom and her insurance company recently. Just look at the results of the saturation patrol on NYE, while there was 3 DUI offenses, there were 11 uninsured drivers;
The saturation results for only the five saturation officers were 3 DWI arrests, 3 speeding citations, 4 seatbelt violations, 1 alcohol offense, 7 driver’s license violations, 27 warning tickets, 11 insurance violations, 1 stoplight violation, and 7 miscellaneous citations issued.
What is the solution? I have often said that the state needs to pass a law that requires anybody purchasing a license plate or renewal on tags to show proof of insurance for the vehicle. If they can’t, they don’t get plates or tags. It makes no sense to me that we require people to carry insurance but don’t enforce it through licensing. It would be a simple way to keep uninsured drivers off the roads. Expired or no plates on a vehicle are an easy way for law enforcement to tell who doesn’t have insurance. Obviously some insurance plans only last 3 months at a time, but I feel that if someone goes through the process to insure a vehicle, they will keep up with it throughout the year.
Some people I spoke with said insurance have gotten ridiculous. Some offer good coverage but too expensive, some are cheap but offer next to no coverage.
One did say it is just same as health insurance.
I would agree. But liability really isn’t that bad. I think I was paying about $20 a month on my last car, and on a new car I lease now I only pay $70 a month for full coverage. The way I look at it, if you can afford the gas or the car payment, you can afford the insurance. Driving is a priviledge NOT a right.
Just another reflection of the “conservative” – screw the government (especially their rules and regulations) attitude that dominates this state.
When I lived in Sioux Falls I sold insurance. I hate to talk this way but people in SD tend to not like to buy things. I will call them “thrifty”, but there are perhaps more offensive words to use. There are people who have no insurance of any kind – auto, renters/homeowners, health. Some are dirt poor. When you make about minimum wage at some dead-end job I understand. But there are just some people who are plain cheap and don’t care if they maim others physically or financially. And some people would just skimp on coverage to save a buck. In auto insurance you don’t save a ton by going cheaper, you just get really worthless coverage. Penny-wise, pound-foolish.
I was surprised at the number of people with no insurance but also with state minimum coverage. In SD that was 25/50/10. That means that you have liability coverage up to $25K per person, up to $50K total per accident and $10K for damage to buildings. This covers your damages to others in the event of an accident where you are ruled at fault or at least partially at fault. We all know that you can barely shake hands with the ER doctor for that price. And with that you are legally insured to drive. So all end up buying uninsured/underinsured coverage to pay for the 1 out of 8 or so drivers on the road who don’t bother to buy any coverage or who just buy the cheapest crap they can find. Yes. We essentially pay for others’ liability insurance.
Minnesota used to require you to list your insurance policy number on the license tab renewal documents. But then they got rid of that. More and more people renew tabs online. I do like this idea of requiring proof of insurance at the time of license tab renewal.
Overall SD is one of the lowest-priced places in America to insure a car. But if you don’t make any money to speak of even the “cheapest” insurance is a stretch.
If everyone had insurance, it’d be affordable because of the scale. It’s expensive because requiring it can’t be enforced. In the 1950’s everyone had car & health insurance because it was cheap and you were shamed if something happened and you didn’t have it. Since that time our culture has decayed and honesty declined. It’s probably impossible to enforce the law. I suggest that every car with a loan on it have part of that loan monthly insurance payments. Others are forced to drive junkers. Then we recognize those without insurance and police will know who to stop and ticket.
This solution is potentially a good one, but a significant problem remains.
I had an auto accident with an uninsured driver (expired coverage). However, he was able to purchase coverage within 24 hours and present proof of insurance to the police. Despite the fact that he wasn’t covered at the time of the accident, the city refused to prosecute him for lack of insurance because he purchased insurance shortly afterward. His lack of insurance meant I had to pay the $1000 deductible to have my car fixed. He declared bankruptcy within six months.
Sure, I feel bad for him. But he was operating a vehicle without insurance and *he* was at fault in the accident. He couldn’t pay, so I had to (my deductible plus my insurance premiums).
Part of the solution might be to have the state and cities enforce the existing laws more strictly. If this means revising the statutes to clarify that insurance must be in force at the time of an accident or traffic stop, it’s a good idea.