Auto insurance policy called racist?

SEEMEFIRST
Posts
13779
Joined
8/21/2006
Location
Arlington, TX, USA
Edited Date/Time 5/11/2012 9:55am
Dallas officials to discuss new impound policy for uninsured vehicles
Dave Levinthal
Apr 03, 2008 (The Dallas Morning News - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) --


Dallas officials remain starkly divided on whether police should impound the vehicles of motorists who cannot produce proof of insurance during routine traffic stops.

Today, the city only impounds uninsured vehicles after responding to traffic accidents. And as the council hurdles toward a planned formal vote later this month, both supporters and opponents of a proposed impoundment expansion say they're not sure which way the vote will go.

District 13 council member Mitchell Rasansky remains the body's most vocal policy advocate, saying that increased impoundment of uninsured vehicles will protect the health and property of people who own valid auto insurance.

"And when people know that their car is going to get towed, they're going to start getting insurance," Mr. Rasansky told his council colleagues during an hourlong debate on the issue Wednesday at City Hall.

"I just can't imagine that you pull somebody over, and they don't have proof of insurance or a driver license, and you let them drive away," said District 11 council member Linda Koop, the body's transportation and environment committee chairwoman.

"They choose not to do it ... and I end up paying for it," District 10 council member Jerry Allen said of uninsured motorists.

The council is scheduled to vote on the proposed policy April 23. And while some council members such as Mayor Tom Leppert remain undecided, the policy is destined to face stiff opposition. District 7 council member Carolyn Davis, for example, argued Wednesday that the proposed impoundment policy would target racial and ethnic minorities, who police say compose the greatest number of Dallas drivers without insurance.

She suggested that police first provide uninsured drivers a warning, then tow their cars upon a second offense.

"This really affects African Americans and Hispanics. ... it's another way to go about harassing young African American males," Ms. Davis said. "It doesn't solve the problem."


District 5 council member Vonciel Jones Hill also opposed the impoundment plan, but for different reasons. "This is not a racial issue, it's an economic issue. People don't have insurance because they can't afford it," Ms. Hill said, adding that impounding poor people's cars creates cyclical problems where they are stripped of their ability to work, and therefore, earn money.

Mayor Pro Tem Elba Garcia, meanwhile, said the expanded impoundment policy would lead to an overburdened auto pound.

The draft policy's background material acknowledges the possibility of crowding, calling for the auto pound to be closed to cars towed for no proof of insurance if the pound is 90 percent full. Today, the pound is 63 percent full, on average, according to city records.

Such a towing policy wouldn't be cheap, either: Early city estimates peg first-year revenue losses at about $1.56 million. By the policy's second year, estimates suggest the city would earn $440,500. The program is unlikely to break even for several years.

Official are estimating that about 35,000 additional vehicles a year will be towed if the department begins towing vehicles that don't have insurance -- about 96 additional cars per day.

In April 2006, Dallas Police Department began towing vehicles without insurance following traffic accidents. Police had estimated prior to the program's inception that about 30 vehicles a day would be towed -- but police today say they're only towing nine or 10 vehicles a day. Meanwhile, police officers issue about 75,000 citations a year for no insurance.

Currently, about 124 vehicles are towed to the pound each day. The pound has about 2,400 spaces, and on any given day, about 1,500 spaces are filled.

In other council news, the city's Code Compliance Department requested an 8 percent boost in funding this year to assist in reorganizing the troubled department.

Acting Code Compliance Director Forest Turner needs more than $1.8 million to help pay for a plan that would shift code compliance offices from central locations downtown and in South Dallas into five districts of the city, potentially saving code officers hours of travel time per day and keeping them on the streets longer.

Several council members let Mr. Turner know how angry they are about the city's ongoing struggle with enforcing code, particularly in poorer areas of the city. Despite frustration over the department's history, the council appeared ready to support Mr. Turner's request of additional funds.

The council also expressed support for a plan to create an electronic campaign finance filing system, which City Secretary Deborah Watkins recently proposed. Ms. Watkins says the system, a cost estimate for which has not been solidified, could be operational by July.
|
KAWboy14
Posts
6502
Joined
12/31/2007
Location
Austin, TX, USA
4/4/2008 8:05am
in texas the tags stay with the car at all times....the little windshield paper may run out of date.

but it seems many people get ins today so they get the new window sticker but fail to keep it.
engine32
Posts
37
Joined
12/13/2006
Location
Houston, TX, USA
4/4/2008 10:37am
Sounds like a good idea to me. I wish the whole state would do that. If your'e caught in a commercial vehicle with no insurance, (especially a class B or larger) they impound the vehicle and the driver is subject to arrest.
4/4/2008 11:47am
I was just telling my wife last night that SHE was the one being racist. I like the idea of pulling their tags if no insurance. We definately need that here.
level
Posts
6184
Joined
8/27/2006
Location
Acworth, GA, USA
4/4/2008 1:42pm Edited Date/Time 4/4/2008 1:52pm
I'm in the car business and one of the most frustrating things we deal with is people not paying their insurance on cars we are financing for them. So many times we repo cars or find them in impound with body damage and guess what-no insurance, so were stuck with a $10,000 car worth about $500. And our customer base-the bad credit, lower to medium income, is mostly black and mexican so they tend to save money as they can and not pay their insurance which is required by law. Many blacks and mexicans we deal with in our business tend to think they are above the law. Then certain people or groups come out and say blacks are being targeted but it's mostly them not abiding by the law to carry insurance on the vehicle. They get the insurance when they get the car then they don't continue to cover the car. We get cancellation notices all the time and have to hammer people to get full coverage. It is frustrating but I guess if your broke that would be something easy to try and ride out so I am not judging but just stating what I see.


I love how Ms. Davis says this is another way to harass african americans. She's throwing the racial card. Have full coverage like you are supposed to and policies like this wouldn't have to go into effect. Bottom line. How about calling out to the african american community to be responsible and follow the law like everyone else instead of throwing the race card and shouting harassment. Unbelievable. The other guy hit it on the head-it's an economic problem-people can't afford it which is what we run into at our dealership. I guess if I was broke I would probably try and slide also so it's hard to judge because $100-$150 a month is tough on many lower income-black or not.

The Shop

APLMAN
Posts
439
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
East Wenatchee, WA, USA
4/4/2008 2:28pm
Insurance required by the state has nothing to do with helping the "owner/driver", only the person that he harms.....

Full coverage is not required by law, only by the lienholders of the autos. Liability insurance is what the law requires.
Frogman
Posts
906
Joined
10/14/2006
Location
Washington, DC, USA
4/4/2008 2:41pm
APLMAN wrote:
Insurance required by the state has nothing to do with helping the "owner/driver", only the person that he harms..... Full coverage is not required by law...
Insurance required by the state has nothing to do with helping the "owner/driver", only the person that he harms.....

Full coverage is not required by law, only by the lienholders of the autos. Liability insurance is what the law requires.
Since you know everything, is that assertion about Washington or all 50 states?
APLMAN
Posts
439
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
East Wenatchee, WA, USA
4/4/2008 2:45pm
APLMAN wrote:
Insurance required by the state has nothing to do with helping the "owner/driver", only the person that he harms..... Full coverage is not required by law...
Insurance required by the state has nothing to do with helping the "owner/driver", only the person that he harms.....

Full coverage is not required by law, only by the lienholders of the autos. Liability insurance is what the law requires.
Frogman wrote:
Since you know everything, is that assertion about Washington or all 50 states?
If there is a state that requires comp and collision, then that is most probably a fairly new thing.

There are some states that require medical payments or uninsured/underinsured coverage, but the one common denominator between states is the liability coverage requirements.
Frogman
Posts
906
Joined
10/14/2006
Location
Washington, DC, USA
4/4/2008 2:58pm
So with a little prodding, we already made progress towards proving that you didn't need to split hairs on Kalisch's post. In addition to the uninsured requirments in some states, think about how often those with the required liability go to court as the result of an accident. Having an advocate at the insurance company and avoiding court and suits for damages helps the owner/driver...no?
APLMAN
Posts
439
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
East Wenatchee, WA, USA
4/4/2008 3:06pm
Frogman wrote:
So with a little prodding, we already made progress towards proving that you didn't need to split hairs on Kalisch's post. In addition to the uninsured...
So with a little prodding, we already made progress towards proving that you didn't need to split hairs on Kalisch's post. In addition to the uninsured requirments in some states, think about how often those with the required liability go to court as the result of an accident. Having an advocate at the insurance company and avoiding court and suits for damages helps the owner/driver...no?
The reasons for requiring it aren't to help the owner/driver, you know that.....

They are to make sure you have the means to pay for someone's loss. UIM requirements go along the same lines, assuming that not everyone is going to be following the law.
Frogman
Posts
906
Joined
10/14/2006
Location
Washington, DC, USA
4/4/2008 3:16pm Edited Date/Time 4/16/2016 6:32pm
The owner/driver clearly benefits when the Insurance company pays for damages caused by an uninsured motiorist. If the state didn't intend to help the driver/owner, then why does the driver/owner get paid?

Key words "nothing to do with helping the owner/driver." You were wrong...move on.

KAWboy14
Posts
6502
Joined
12/31/2007
Location
Austin, TX, USA
4/4/2008 5:22pm
tru dat
racin mason
Posts
881
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Long Beach, WA, USA
4/4/2008 6:30pm
It would be interesting to know what these poor people who cant afford insurance have spent on their rims and stereos.
Big Lenny
Posts
14379
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Compton, CA, USA
4/4/2008 7:01pm Edited Date/Time 4/4/2008 7:02pm
Here's the deal "Kato", White guy get's pulled over he has a better chance of "Not" getting his car towed than a Black or Mexican,even thou nobody had insurance. That's just the way it is, and that's how the system works...
Big Lenny
Posts
14379
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Compton, CA, USA
4/4/2008 7:08pm Edited Date/Time 4/4/2008 7:09pm
It would be interesting to know what these poor people who cant afford insurance have spent on their rims and stereos.
Pffft, simple. I pay $38 a month for liability with some Mexican insurance co. with a clause in it that say's I'm allowed to jump out and run from the scene if able to...
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL, USA
4/4/2008 7:12pm
So racism doesn't exist?
Big Lenny
Posts
14379
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Compton, CA, USA
4/4/2008 7:14pm
"Kato Kalisch"
Larry
Posts
5094
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Fayetteville, GA, USA
4/4/2008 7:15pm
F insurance companies. And I did not even read the first post in this thread.
Big Lenny
Posts
14379
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Compton, CA, USA
4/4/2008 7:16pm
"Kato's" an authority on Black people Dave, he invented them...
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL, USA
4/4/2008 7:21pm
So, there is no favoritism or discrimination?
There is no profiling?
Larry
Posts
5094
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Fayetteville, GA, USA
4/4/2008 7:33pm
You know Lenny I learned a lot more in NJ about hate than I ever did in the deep south.
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL, USA
4/4/2008 7:45pm
Statistical enforcement?

So you agree with favoritism, discrimination and racial profiling

"You're black, so you must be doing something illegal"
flarider
Posts
25496
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Daytona Beach, FL, USA
4/4/2008 7:49pm
Yeah, you did

Post a reply to: Auto insurance policy called racist?

The Latest