Big Rate Hike for Assigned-Risk Car Insurance

I agree with Rick Henderson’s position (“So Let Them Drive Without Car Insurance,” Commentary, Sept. 25) that motorists should not be required by law to purchase auto insurance. But I would go one step further.

I suggest that the tort system be changed so that in any personal injury or property-damage lawsuit involving an automobile accident, the plaintiff’s recovery would be limited to an amount equaling the policy limits of his or her own automobile coverage. For example, a plaintiff owning a policy with $15,000 policy limits could only obtain a judgment of $15,000 or less. A plaintiff with $300,000 policy limits could obtain a judgment of $300,000 or less. And a plaintiff with no insurance would be unable to recover anything.

Under this proposed system, no motorist could draw from the insurance pool any more than he or she puts into it by way of paying premiums. The amount of premiums dollars going into the insurance pool in California would not change, but the amount being drawn out would be drastically reduced as a result of fewer and smaller claims. The savings, in a competitive insurance market, should be passed on to the consumer in the way of lower premiums.

Under our present system, uninsured motorists as a group are certainly willing to go to the courts to recoup their losses when the are injured by an insured motorist. But when the tables are turned, they are usually judgment-proof. The ones left holding the bag are insured motorists.

ROGER P. SPRIGG

Tustin