Why do I still have to show my automobile insurance card?

[techs]

It would be simple thing for states to keep a database of insurance.

C'mon get with it.

 

[olds]

It would be simple thing for states to keep a database of insurance.

C'mon get with it.

Get used to showing your papers.

 

[Kelvrick]

It would be simple thing for states to keep a database of insurance.

C'mon get with it.

I think California already does this. However, cops still issue fix-it tickets if you don't have proof with you. The only reason I could come up with was to give to other drivers in any situations that would require an exchange of information.

 

[andylawcc]

I think California already does this. However, cops still issue fix-it tickets if you don't have proof with you. The only reason I could come up with was to give to other drivers in any situations that would require an exchange of information.

that makes sense, the latter part. but yes, cop still charged me without no proof of insurance when i was pulled over for speeding. Fine is like $800, even though it was dropped after i go to court to show proof, still a hassle.

 

[Dulanic]

MA ties it to your plate. No insurance card needed unless out of state.

 

[sactoking]

As a state that has a database, it's no easy feat. It's expensive to start, expensive to maintain, even more expensive to keep up-to-the-second, and there are very large gaps in data which can make the system unusable.

 

[Lifted]

As a state that has a database, it's no easy feat. It's expensive to start, expensive to maintain, even more expensive to keep up-to-the-second, and there are very large gaps in data which can make the system unusable.

But is there any other way to ensure a driver has insurance? Unless the states requires insurance companies to notify them of coverage, and a drop in coverage, there is no way for the officer to know from merely looking at a piece of paper that the insurance policy is still active.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

But is there any other way to ensure a driver has insurance? Unless the states requires insurance companies to notify them of coverage, and a drop in coverage, there is no way for the officer to know from merely looking at a piece of paper that the insurance policy is still active.

I thought they actually did require that kind of notification? Maybe not every state? Maybe I'm full of it?

Well, I mean, I know I'm full of it... but yeah.

 

[sactoking]

But is there any other way to ensure a driver has insurance? Unless the states requires insurance companies to notify them of coverage, and a drop in coverage, there is no way for the officer to know from merely looking at a piece of paper that the insurance policy is still active.

You're right that presence of an insurance card is not an indicator of valid insurance, but in the real world neither is presence or lack of presence in a DMV/insurance database.

 

[Lifted]

You're right that presence of an insurance card is not an indicator of valid insurance, but in the real world neither is presence or lack of presence in a DMV/insurance database.

Are you saying these systems are too expensive and we should do away with them in favor of the honor system or something else less expensive and more reliable, or are you merely pointing out that these systems are expensive and imperfect?

 

[sactoking]

Are you saying these systems are too expensive and we should do away with them in favor of the honor system, or something else less expensive and more reliable, or are you merely pointing out that these systems are expensive and imperfect?

Merely pointing out that they're very expensive and extremely imperfect. Our NVLive database, which is a "real time" database, has cost us hundreds of millions and only has a success rate of just over 50%.

 

[Lifted]

Merely pointing out that they're very expensive and extremely imperfect. Our NVLive database, which is a "real time" database, has cost us hundreds of millions and only has a success rate of just over 50%.

Success at what?

 

[DrPizza]

You're right that presence of an insurance card is not an indicator of valid insurance, but in the real world neither is presence or lack of presence in a DMV/insurance database.

As far as I'm aware, NY's database is kept up to date quite well. You can hear over the scanner when officers call in a license plate.

 

[sactoking]

Success at what?

Success at properly identifying coverage.

What can go wrong? Let's see...

How often do the insurers update the system? Monthly? Weekly? Daily? There's still the possibility that insurance has lapsed.

We are a relatively small state, yet we have over 500 insurers that write some form of private passenger motor vehicle liability insurance. DO you know how many different database systems they use? About 500. That means that whatever system the DMV uses needs to be able to accept data dumps from 500 proprietary systems.

How does the system process data? What happens if two insurers report the same car? What happens you change insurers and the new insurer reports the car add before the old insurer reports the car drop? (many systems don't track history, so the late report on the drop will override the report of the add and show as no insurance)

How does the system error-check the data? Is John Sullivan the same as John D. Sullivan? How about Jon Sullivan? Or Jhon Sullavan?

I've been in the room as DMV and insurers have fought over the requirements of digital insurance verification and it is not a simple subject.

 

[EagleKeeper]

You're right that presence of an insurance card is not an indicator of valid insurance, but in the real world neither is presence or lack of presence in a DMV/insurance database.

Merely pointing out that they're very expensive and extremely imperfect. Our NVLive database, which is a "real time" database, has cost us hundreds of millions and only has a success rate of just over 50%.

As far as I'm aware, NY's database is kept up to date quite well. You can hear over the scanner when officers call in a license plate.

Having worked with NV back in the early 2000 time frame;

Insurance companies are required to send electronic updates to the state once a month on those who policies have been terminated.

They also send a list of new policies.

Eventually, those that have changed policy carriers get synched back up.

However, there is a potential 30-60 day window that you could be without insurance and the state does not know about it.


Same reason for having an insurance card; shows that on such a date you were covered for at least 30 days - enough time for you to get entered into the system.

Now, if the states would allow a "bounty hunter" to go after the dropped policy holders that do not turn in their plates; that would get many uninsured vehicles off the road.

Potentialy lower the value of salvaged vehicles also by flooding the salvage yards :thumbsup:

 

[Lifted]

Success at properly identifying coverage.

If that is only working at 50% then the state would have never paid for it, or sued if the company selling it couldn't get it working. That sounds like a failure in leadership, if not outright fraud.

NY does it fine. Perhaps NV needs to see how another state successfully implements this? Perhaps they just need to bring in someone, even as an expert consultant, to plan an execute on this properly.

It's pretty simple really. The state defines which data, in which format, and how often. The insurance companies meet these requirements if they want to be licensed to sell automobile insurance in the state. If they fail, their licensed is revoked.

What can go wrong? Let's see...

How often do the insurers update the system? Monthly? Weekly? Daily? There's still the possibility that insurance has lapsed.

Daily for the system to be useful. If daily, the posibility that insurance has lapsed on the same date that the tags are run by the police are quite slim. Nowhere near 50%. More like a tiny fraction of a percent.

We are a relatively small state, yet we have over 500 insurers that write some form of private passenger motor vehicle liability insurance. DO you know how many different database systems they use? About 500. That means that whatever system the DMV uses needs to be able to accept data dumps from 500 proprietary systems.

No, that means the insurers who do business in this state need to provide the info in the format your state requires or else they cannot do business in your state. It's starting to sound like Nevada politicians are in the pockets of the insurance industry.

How does the system process data? What happens if two insurers report the same car? What happens you change insurers and the new insurer reports the car add before the old insurer reports the car drop? (many systems don't track history, so the late report on the drop will override the report of the add and show as no insurance)

This is a rather simple problem that any competent developers/contractors could solve. It would actually be the concern of the company contracted to implement the system. If they can't do it, don't pay and find a company that can. If other states can do this, why can't NV?

How does the system error-check the data? Is John Sullivan the same as John D. Sullivan? How about Jon Sullivan? Or Jhon Sullavan?

Why does this matter with automobile insurance? The car is insured, not the owner of the car or the policy. Every car has a unique VIN, so why the policy holders name would be an issue is beyond me. Do you know what unique identifiers are?

I've been in the room as DMV and insurers have fought over the requirements of digital insurance verification and it is not a simple subject.

I wouldn't brag about such a failure, especially on a forum filled with developers and other IT professionals.

 

[sactoking]

Eagle: The "eventually" in your post is the problem. If someone doesn't have insurance and it eventually gets synched up then there's not much marginal benefit over just using cards. On the flip side, in NV it is illegal to be without insurance for even one day. Many of the problems stem from false-negatives, or the system showing no insurance when it does exist. That takes time ans expense to rectify.

Then you have to add in the confusion about auto insurance expiration. Did you know that, nationally, if your insurance expires 3/1/13 that it actually expires at 12:01 am on that date? The effective expiration is 2/28/13. Lots of people don't know this, so they shop for a new policy to start on 3/2/13, since they think they're covered for 3/1/13. That leads to a one-day lapse, which is a huge issue.

Lifted: Speaking from experience, it is not as simple as any of your suggestions. To say "It's easy, just do this" ignores the fact that in practice it's like implementing a large-scale ERP conversion. Hell, the politics are more complicated? Comply or leave? Watch 95% of your insurers leave and premiums skyrocket.

 

[Lifted]

Lifted: Speaking from experience, it is not as simple as any of your suggestions. To say "It's easy, just do this" ignores the fact that in practice it's like implementing a large-scale ERP conversion. Hell, the politics are more complicated? Comply or leave? Watch 95% of your insurers leave and premiums skyrocket.

This discussion went from odd to absurd. Hundreds of millions to implement? Error checking names? ERP conversions? 95% of insurers ceasing to business in NV because they would be required to send daily updates consisting of VIN, date of change, and reason (add/drop), when most if not all other states require this same basic information?

Really, it's been... interesting.

 

[sdifox]

It would be simple thing for states to keep a database of insurance.

C'mon get with it.

Because it is one more thing they can ticket you on.

 

[natto fire]

Driving's a privilege, not a right!

Are you moving your insurance card around so much that it is so hard to keep one in your vehicle? My insurance company gives me three cards. One goes in my wallet, the other in my glove box with all the other important papers (like the users manual) and the third in a safe place at home.

I would rather the states execute people for driving crimes rather than worry about who has an insurance card. As a driver that just wants to use the roads to drive and get to my destination I am clearly in the minority though. Text and call away fellow drivers...

 

[sactoking]

February 12 is our next Property & Casualty Commissioner's Advisory Committee. I'm sure the DMV folks will be there with an update on NVLive; I know the industry folks will be there (that's kinda the point of the committee). You're more than welcome to hoof it on over to Carson City, NV and hear for yourself what a mess it is, it's an Open Meeting by statute so anyone can attend.

 

[Wreckem]

As far as I'm aware, NY's database is kept up to date quite well. You can hear over the scanner when officers call in a license plate.

Texas is even more effiecent. The officers don't even have to call in the plate. They have cameras/scanners in thier cars that scan the license plates and pulls the data automatically. When you get pulled over they are already in the process of having you registration and insurance data pulled up.

They still ask for the insurance card though. If you don't have it, you get a ticket that will cost you a small fee to get is dismissed. That is unless you dont actually have insurance and then in some places in Texas they tow your car on the spot.

 

[techs]

You're right that presence of an insurance card is not an indicator of valid insurance, but in the real world neither is presence or lack of presence in a DMV/insurance database.

Some years ago there was a big problem with unlicensed taxis in New York City who would take out an insurance policy and opt to pay in installments. They would only pay the initial fee. They would be cancelled for non payment after a couple of months. They would still have their insurance card and carry it for a year and show it to the police if they got stopped.

 

[MovingTarget]

MA ties it to your plate. No insurance card needed unless out of state.

We're starting this in AL as well, despite having had a mandatory insurance law for years. We tied this to the plates a few years ago, but people tried to skirt that by obtaining insurance, getting the plates, and then cancelling the policy. Now, we've obligated insurance companies to notify the government when a policy is enacted/cancelled to catch these people. Car insurance is mandatory, for good reason.

 

[CPA]

simple and government just don't mix.