INSURANCE OR TAXPAYERS - WHO SHOULD PAY FOR NEGLIGENCE?
The insurance industry lobbied and won legislation forcing all Ohio drivers to carry insurance based on the premise that the insurance industry would cover costs associated with the direct and proximate results of their policyholders’ negligent driving. Due to Ohio's Strong Home Rule Law, the insurance industry has resorted to using the media to "muddy" the message in an effort to distract readers and deflect their financial responsibility to their policyholders, as well as innocent taxpayers. The insurance industry is literally "banking" on elected officials being intimidated and succumbing to negative media attention and halting negligent driving fees. When negligent driving fees are halted, insurance is able to keep our premium dollars and also enjoy the financial benefits of taxpayers picking up their negligent policyholder's tab. this is literally double profit for insurance. We are all being called upon to be more fiscally accountable and responsible, why should Ohio legislators allow the insurance industry to be exempt from this call?
Cost Recovery Corp. recognizes that the media is extremely well funded by marketing dollars, controls the “ink” and is in the business of “selling” the news. However, the media only has power, if our elected officials and we buy what they are “selling”.
The following is factual clarification of the original “muddied” message “reported” by the DDN:
In the reporting for Miami Twp, it is unfortunate that we, Cost Recovery Corp, were not given the opportunity to further assist Miami Twp. as they merge with Miamisburg. Ceasing the crash-billing program due to the merger will not only cost the Fire Department, but also the innocent hardworking taxpayers of the community. While at absolutely no cost to the township or citizens of Miami Twp., being reimbursed $20,000 was indeed a benefit as it minimizes costs to the citizens of Miami Twp. Taxpayers may have a different view of $20,000 than reported by the DDN. Not only is $20,000 a TAX RELIEF it also provides desperately needed staffing or equipment that can save lives!
Regarding the City of Franklin, the news reporter stated CRC had a $250 charge cap on structure fires and crash billing. On June 12, 2011, Dr. Henley sent a letter to Chief Westendorf, at the Chief’s request, stating that CRC would agree to a cap on structure fires and also Hazmat incidents, except those Hazmat charges over $30,000 (due to additional costs incurred in recovering said costs). The newspaper errantly included crash billing in that statement. No caps for crash billing were ever discussed or agreed upon and the contract did not include any such “cap”.
The original article errantly stated that CRC charged 39% of the claim. FACT is that the entire bill, including Franklin’s Department charges and CRC’s administrative costs equaled $1265.90. Franklin Fire Department would have received $907.80, CRC $358.10 or 28.2% of the total costs to the invoice. However, insurance rejected the claim, so no one was paid and CRC regardless, of the work performed, received $0 dollars, During the course of business, CRC provided full disclosure to Franklin via monthly and quarterly reporting. During the contract, CRC provided $70,683.60 to the City of Franklin, at absolutely no cost to the City. These funds were a direct benefit to the fire department, minimized cost to provide the service and were a financial break for the innocent taxpayers in Franklin. Due to the media “attention” the financial break will instead be given back to the insurance industry.
The debate over local governments, public safety and the program for user fees brings out a wide range of opinions, however, a decrease in tax revenues and an increased demand for services are FACTS and truly putting public safety at risk.
Are there some communities and departments that have mismanaged funds? Perhaps. However to imply that ALL communities are guilty of mismanagement and that is the reason for staff shortages, fire station closures, or lack of equipment is simply not the truth. While scrutinizing management by departments and local governments, it is only fair that we do the same type of investigating and scrutinizing as it relates to the insurance industry. The insurance industry must be held accountable for the premium dollars they collect and the claims they deny.
Assessing negligent driving fees absolutely has not, and does not raise insurance rates. That claim by insurance intimidates citizens and makes for a “catchy” sound bite in the media. Fact is if your premiums were adjusted it would be because you were at-fault and considered a higher risk. This would occur with or without negligent driving fees. Assessing negligent driving fees to ONLY negligent drivers’ and their insurance provider (never victims), exempting taxpayers from out-of-pocket costs and all at absolutely zero cost to the community or taxpayers, is fiscally responsible and fair.
Regardless of personal or political opinion, we could all agree that this is a time in which Ohio citizens desperately need a financial break.
Either we ask our elected officials to hold the insurance companies accountable or in many cases, our elected officials will be forced to raise our taxes.
Are your elected officials pro-insurance or pro-taxpayer?
Respectfully,
Regina Moore Jones
