<html>

<head>
<meta name="bill" content="HB4193">
<meta name="title" content="Summary As Introduced (3/4/2015)">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered)">
<title>HB4193 - Summary As Introduced (3/4/2015)</title>


</head>

<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="#954F72"><img src="/halogo.gif" width="158" height="120">

<div>

<p><b>PROOF OF AUTO INSURANCE</b></p>



<p><b>House Bill 4193 as introduced</b></p>

<p><b>Sponsor:  Rep. Aric Nesbitt</b></p>

<p><b>Committee:  Insurance</b></p>

<p><b>Complete to 3-4-15</b></p>



<p style='text-align:justify'><b>SUMMARY: </b></p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'><a name="StartText"></a>Under the Insurance Code, generally speaking, auto insurance
coverage is mandatory for the operation of a motor vehicle.  Under the Vehicle
Code, drivers must show proof of no-fault auto insurance at the request of a
police officer. The Vehicle Code also describes the manner in which proof of
insurance is to be provided to the Secretary of State when registering a motor
vehicle.  Under both statutes, auto insurance companies must regularly transmit
information about the vehicles they insure to the Department of State.  <u>House
Bill 4193</u> would amend the Vehicle Code (at MCL 257.227 &amp; 328) regarding
this system in the following ways.</p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'>** A certificate
of insurance in electronic form would be considered prima facie evidence that
motor vehicle insurance is in force when proof of insurance was requested by a
police officer.</p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'>** If a person
displayed an electronic copy of the certificate of insurance using an
electronic device, the police officer could only view the copy of the
certificate and would be prohibited from manipulating the device to view any
other information on the device.  A person who displayed a certificate of
insurance using an electronic device would not be presumed to have consented to
a search for that device.  The state, a law enforcement agency, or an employee
of the state or law enforcement agency, would not be liable for damage to an electronic
device as a result of a police officer's viewing of the device, regardless of
who was in possession of the device at the time of the damage.</p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'>** The Secretary
of State would have to make the vehicle policy information from insurance
companies available to the State Police for the purpose of determining whether
evidence exists that a motor vehicle is insured.  Currently, policy information
submitted by an insurance company and received by the Secretary of State is
confidential, is not subject to the Freedom of Information Act, and is not to
be disclosed to any person except the Department of Community Health (for
certain specified purposes) or under an order by a court of competent
jurisdiction in connection with a claim or fraud investigation or prosecution.</p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'>(An insurance
company must send the Secretary of State for each of its policies: the
automobile insurer's name, the named insured, the named insured's address, the
vehicle identification number for each such vehicle listed on the policy, and
the policy number.  The information is to be sent in a format and on a timeline
specified by the SOS, although not more often than every 14 days.  The
Secretary of State must accept as proof of vehicle insurance a transmission of
the insured vehicle's vehicle identification number.)</p>



<p style='text-align:justify'><b>FISCAL IMPACT:</b> </p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'>The bill would
have no significant fiscal impact on the Michigan State Police.</p>



<p style='margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify'>The bill would
have no significant fiscal impact on the Secretary of State, as any potential
increased administrative costs would be absorbed by current funding levels.</p>































































<p style='text-align:justify'>                                                                                        Legislative
Analyst:   <a name="Analyst"></a>Chris Couch</p>

<p style='text-align:justify'>                                                                                                Fiscal
Analyst:   Paul Holland</p>

<p style='text-align:justify'>                                                                                                                           Perry
Zielak</p>

<div style='border:none;border-bottom:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 1.0pt 0in'>



</div>

<p style='text-align:justify'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>&#9632;</span><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>
This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by
House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official
statement of legislative intent.</span></p>



</div>

</body>

</html>