Paying a fee for CAR ACCIDENTS gaining traction.

[Nikki Stone1]

http://www.capitolweekly.net/article.php?xid=yn067vdmlp93bj

'Crash tax’ gaining ground in California

A recession-spawned move to bill out-of-area drivers for the locals’ costs of cleaning up traffic crashes, once limited to a handful of municipalities in California, is gaining ground across the state. But dozens of local municipalities and fire protection districts are levying the “crash tax,” which typically ranges between $500 and $2,000, to replenish local coffers.

Laws have been on the books for years allowing local cities and governments to collect for the cost handling accidents – and many have. The idea is that the charge – called an accident-fee or crash tax – allows the locals to recoup lost costs spent on handling accidents. Strapped for money and shouldering the responsibility to deal with emergencies, the locals see any way of covering their costs as worthwhile. Private billing and collection agencies are pitching local governments on the benefits of aggressively going after the accident-fee revenue. And with local governments scrambling for money, the arguments are hitting home.

A Capitol Weekly story last year reported about a dozen local entities had approved the crash tax. This week, one insurer said the number now is 25 to 30 agencies, while another estimated it was closer to 60 agencies that have either approved or are near to approving the fee. Sacramento is considering such an ordinance, Stockton approved one last month. The rules differ from town to town: Some only bill out-of-town, at-fault drivers. Others bill regardless of fault or residence.

“It’s primarily an economic argument. They (the vendors) are portraying it as a readily available source of funding,” said Sam Sorich of the Association of California Insurance Companies. “We are getting more and more concerned because it has an impact on our customers and the insurance companies, and an impact on our rates,” Sorich said.

“Some of these ordinances only go after people with insurance,” he added, “which I think is really outlandish. You’re punishing people who actually buy insurance, but the people who disobey the law – you don’t go after them.”

[Trillo]

1. Another regressive user fee.

Hardest on the poor.

[Liberal_in_LA]

16. +100

[Newsjock]

2. Disgusting

Welcome to America. One strike and you're out. Ruined forever. Might as well kill yourself.

Can't wait till an unemployed teabagger has a crash and is assessed $2,000.

[elehhhhna]

3. the in surance copanies pay this extortionate fee?

they will litigate against it, fersure.

sounds scammy and cheesy.

[taught_me_patience]

4. What the fuck do I pay taxes for?

I pay taxes for a fire department and then get fined on top of it? This sucks.

[hayu_lol]

5. Laws are so strange today...

the other side of the coin to this situation would be to cut taxes for fire and police since they will collect from people who have fires/accidents.

Don't think this one will fly without ruffled feathers flying all over the place.

[FreakinDJ]

8. Say "Thank You Arnold for Fucking Up the State"

I wonder how many of these Broke Municipalities remember when Arnold settled the $9Billion settlement against Enron for pennys on the dollar

[anonymous171]

29. That's the point of the fee. To make your dislike taxes even more

It's win-win for the GOP/libertarian types. Not only do they get their favorite kind of tax, but they also get to increase anti-tax sentiment without actually doing anything.

[Nikki Stone1]

6. Cash strapped California is really considering these.

LA is actually being targeted for fees like these.

[Liberal_in_LA]

17. They already got us with those $500-ticket-redlight_camera thingys

[AzNick]

7. Aggressive drivers should be punished, but...

Go prove that one caused an accident purposely.

A bed cover flew off my pickup truck 3 years ago and I was found guilty of causing a collision when a car struck it and broke it's side view mirror.

It was actually the manufacturer's fault but I did not bother going after him as there were no casualties and the damage was light.

Still, I've been paying a few more bucks in insurance every month because of that.

Now to my point: aggressive drivers who cause a collision should definitely be punished with an extra fine.

I am talking about the moron who tail gates you on the freeway at 75+ mph when you're going at the same exact speed as the guy ahead of you and you keep your 1.5 to 2 seconds between cars, and the moron punishes you for "wasting freeway space".

This type of moron ends up causing a crash. Always. Inevitably.

[LiberalFighter]

10. Just put a sign on the back of your car.

Warning: Radioactive Waste. Following too close causes sterilization.

[AzNick]

12. Haha good one.

I thought about stickers. "Go tailgate a cop!"

I have seen one tailgate an 18-wheeler.

Seriously, I can't believe the absence of PA signs on American road.

In Europe it's everywhere.

[Nikki Stone1]

13. loL!

:D

[LiberalFighter]

9. Private billing and collection agencies are pitching local governments

I say that they pay double the cost and arrange for army tanks to crash the vehicles of those in those agencies.

[Nikki Stone1]

11. Yes. For a 20% fee.

The insurance companies are not happy about this crash tax and are blowing the whistle on some of these agencies.

[Blackhatjack]

14. Just a Precursor to the 'breathing our air tax' n/t

[Nikki Stone1]

15. Yup

..

[951-Riverside]

18. ANOTHER TAX?

:mad:

[dysfunctional press]

19. what do the people who clean up/handle the accidents do when they aren't doing that...?

:shrug:

i assumed that it's just part of their overall job description, already covered by their regular paycheck.
for instance- if they normally do maintenance/cleanup work along the roads & highways- why would cleaning up at an accident scene add to their compensation?

[Generic Brad]

20. Nothing like penalizing people for a bad stroke of luck

They have to fix or replace their car, most likely receive medical treatment, and face increased insurance rates. This is about as stupid as eliminating 12th grade.

[npk]

21. Just as long as I get to sue the state after running over a pot hole and damaging my car

And I will be collecting a lot more than $2,000 I can promise you that.

[dysfunctional press]

28. in many places you can.

usually it municipalities that pay for pothole damage. chicago does.

[cornermouse]

22. So, you have cost of repairs to your car, increased insurance rates,

and a large fine on top of everything else and that's not even considering the possibility of physical injury to yourself and your family.

Pretty harsh punishment if you ask me.

[npk]

23. In a related story: State of California to remove speed limits and road sign warnings

Too much road clutter.

State also considering removing some traffic signals and replacing them with first come, first go system.

[Blue_Tires]

24. what's next? charging prisoners for rent??

don't tell me they haven't thought of it... i remember a dumb warden in New England a few years ago trying it for a few weeks until the state wised him up...

[Nikki Stone1]

27. Wow, that's along the same lines, isn't it.

...

[dysfunctional press]

30. a lot of places are doing just that.

http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/05/doing-time-on-their-own-dime-more-states-charging-inmates-for-stays-in-jail-prison.html

Doing time on their own dime: More states charge inmates for stays in jail, prison

[jmowreader]

32. It's being done

http://www.southernstudies.org/2009/05/doing-time-on-their-own-dime-more-states-charging-inmates-for-stays-in-jail-prison.html

According to this, Arpaio charges his inmates $1.25 a day for what Arpaio refers to as food (remember, his cost is 30 cents per day, meaning his food service program brings in over $270,000 per month in clear profit)

[Blue_Tires]

34. i remember when it was tried in RI

the state's legal staff went to the warden and said in so many words that charging inmates rent could technically elevate them to the legal status of "renters", granting them all the protections of that designation...

[Kyril Enko]

25. [belch]

Whut?

[Sebastian Doyle]

26. So what kind of a tax cut do you get, if you haven't had a crash in over 20 years?

I mean, that's only fair, isn't it?

[bridgit]

31. Then it better come down to 'comparative negligence' or it will not fly uniformly

0% contribution to the accident 0% crash tax, either way rates will likely go up as with uninsured motorist coverage - I can see underwriters angling for that

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

33. There are already citations for being at fault and your car insurance.

More tax bullshit.