BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE
Senator Herschel Rosenthal, Chairman
Senate Bill 350 (Peace) Hearing Date: April 5,
1995
As Amended: March 21, 1995
Fiscal: Yes
SUMMARY:
SB 350 would allow a portion of funds authorized for automobile
insurance fraud and theft programs to be used to investigate and
prosecute other types of insurance fraud uncovered in the course of
auto fraud and theft cases.
DIGEST:
Existing law
Requires each insurer doing business in this state to pay an annual
fee, not to exceed one dollar ($1), for each vehicle it insures to
fund the increased investigation and prosecution of fraudulent
automobile insurance claims and automobile theft. The funds
collected are distributed primarily to (1) the Department of
Insurance Bureau of Fraudulent Claims, and (2) District Attorneys,
with a small portion of the funds going to (3) the California
Highway Patrol.
This bill:
Requires that the funds distributed from the annual vehicle fees
assessed on insurance companies shall be used solely for
investigating and prosecuting automobile insurance fraud and
economic automobile theft, except that up to 25% of the distributed
funds may be used to investigate and prosecute other types of
insurance fraud uncovered in the course of pursuing auto insurance
fraud and auto theft.
COMMENTS:
1. Purpose of the bill. The author introduced SB 350 in order to
give District Attorneys greater flexibility and resources to pursue
insurance fraud activities uncovered in the course of pursuing an
auto insurance fraud or auto theft case. According to the author,
the District Attorneys report that often a variety of insurance
fraud cases turn up during auto insurance fraud investigations but
cannot be prosecuted due to lack of funding. SB 350 will allow
these additional insurance fraud cases to be pursued.
2. Support. The Department of Insurance and the District Attorney
of San Diego County support SB 350 arguing that the measure will
strengthen the fight against insurance fraud. In order to promote
even greater flexibility to combat insurance fraud, the San Diego DA
suggests that the bill be amended to delete the requirement that
other types of insurance fraud can only be pursued if odiscovered in
the course of pursuing automobile insurance fraud and economic
automobile theft.o
3. Opposition. The opponents of SB 350 argue that the funds
diverted by the bill for a broad array of insurance fraud activities
come from assessments on automobile insurance policies, and should
therefore only be used for the investigation and prosecution of
automobile insurance-related fraud, rather than being diverted for
other arguably deserving, but unrelated enforcement activities.
They argue that auto fraud and theft is on the rise, and the
existing funds should be dedicated to this problem.
They also maintain that diverting these funds from auto fraud and
theft cases amounts to an improper tax on insurance companies.
4. Prior Legislation. SB 1743 (Lockyer), Chap. 1248 of 1994, and
AB 1926 (Peace), Chap. 1247 of 1994, earmarked a portion of the
annual automobile insurance vehicle fees to the California Highway
Patrol and to the District Attorneys to fund the investigation and
prevention of o economic automobile theft.o Allowing use of these
funds for automobile "theft" cases set a precedent for using some of
these funds in criminal investigations other than traditional
automobile fraud cases.
POSITIONS:
Support:
Department of Insurance
San Diego County District Attorney
Oppose:
Alliance of American Insurers
Personal Insurance Federation of California
State Farm Insurance Companies
Consultant: Michael Shapiro