Washington State legislators are moving ahead with a bill providing coverage against uninsured motorists that was drafted after an insurer balked at paying a claim lodged by the innocent victim of a road rage incident.

The measure, which was sought by Democratic Insurance Commissioner Mike Kreidler and titled “Ethel's Bill,” was unanimously approved by the House Financial Institutions & Insurance Committee last week and is now with the House Rules Committee.

Under the bill's language, coverage is required whether or not an event was intentional unless the insurer can demonstrate that the insured intended to cause the damage for which the insured is seeking coverage.

Accident is defined as an occurrence that is unexpected and unintended from the standpoint of the covered person.

Commissioner Kreidler said he sought the bill after an accident last year involving Ethel Adams, which caused “unprecedented public outcry.”

Ms. Adams, 60, was injured in a five-car pileup that was caused by a man trying to run his girlfriend's pickup truck off the road.

After she was cut from her car, Ms. Adams was in a coma for nine days.

When Ms. Adams lodged a claim her insurer, Truck Insurance Exchange, an affiliate of Farmers Insurance, denied it on the grounds it was the result of an intentional act. The carrier ultimately reversed its decision after the commissioner threatened legal action.

According to Mr. Kreidler, the case caused an “unprecedented public outcry” drawing more e-mails to his department than any issue in the past six years.

Kenton Brine, northwest regional manager for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, said the bill, is now with the Rules Committee, which will likely schedule a vote by the full House in the coming weeks and an identical Senate bill could be considered in committee this week.

He said his organization was supportive of the measure because it was modified to allow insurers to guard against fraud while protecting “innocent victims of collisions that are caused–on purpose or due to an accident–by uninsured motorists.”

Mr. Brine said without an amendment by bill sponsor Rep. Mark Ericks, D-Bothell, insurers would have potentially been exposed to the chance that an alleged “intended victim” might actually be colluding with the driver who caused a collision in order to collect insurance proceeds.

The amendment, he explained, makes no changes to the protection the bill offers to unintended “third-party” victims.

At a hearing by the Financial Institutions and Insurance Committee, the panel heard Mr. Kreidler and the State Trial Layers speak in support of the bill.

Insurance interests that testified and voiced some concerns included PCI, Allstate, SAFECO, American Insurance Association and State Farm Insurance.

Special Reports /

Washington State Moves Road Rage Bill

Related Stories

Recommended For You