Opinion
No. 2022-C-00789
09-20-2022
Leon WILLIAMS v. FINANCIAL INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.
Writ application denied.
McCallum, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
McCALLUM, J., concurs and assigns reasons.
Louisiana Revised Statute 32:863.1 provides three forms that constitute a certificate of insurance by the insurer to the insured: 1) a compliant insurance identification (ID) card; 2) the insurance policy or a copy thereof; or 3) an insurance policy binder or copy thereof. In this matter, Financial Indemnity provided a complete and compliant policy to Mrs. Jones, which excluded Mr. Jones as a driver. However, it also provided an ID card that did not list Mr. Jones as an excluded driver, as required by La. R.S. 32:863.1 A(1)(a)(v). Thus, the ID card that Mr. Jones presented to the police officer responding to the accident in this case did not comply with the statute. Although Financial Indemnity offered the complete insurance policy as proof that Mr. Jones was an excluded driver, the ID card it issued to Mr. Jones and which Mr. Jones presented at the scene of the accident did not comply with La. R.S. 32:863.1 and thus, not one of the valid options for proving coverage. By issuing a valid insurance policy but also an invalid insurance ID card, Financial Indemnity may ultimately be successful in denying a claim based on an excluded driver exclusion. However, it also has no consequences for issuing improper ID cards. This case demonstrates the possibility that an insurer may profit from this misleading system.
La. R.S. 32:863.1 A(1) provides as follows:
An insurance identification card, a photocopy of the card, or an image of the card displayed on a mobile electronic device, issued by an insurer to its insured which shall contain the following information:
(i) The name and address of the insurance company.
(ii) The insurance policy number.
(iii) A description of the motor vehicle insured under the policy.
(iv) The effective date and the expiration date of the policy.
(v) The name of any person who is excluded from coverage as authorized by R.S. 32:900(L).
(Emphasis added).
There is merit to Petitioner's claim that this potentially misleading system is an issue of public policy concern. The current statute allows for uninsured, presumably high-risk drivers to drive on public roads with impunity if stopped by the police. If the insurance card that the uninsured driver produces for the police officer does not include his or her name as an excluded driver, the officer would have no way of knowing that the driver is not insured unless he were given the complete insurance policy to analyze, which is not reasonable during a brief police stop.
Ideally, an insurance ID card would reflect the basic information required by La. R.S. 23:863.1 A(1)(a). When an officer accepts the ID card as valid proof of insurance, the acceptance is predicated on the assumption that the ID card's information is representative of the insurance policy. Obviously, as this case demonstrates, this is not always the case.
While the current framework may be an issue of public policy that could endanger law abiding drivers, it is an issue for the legislature rather than this Court. The law allows this system to currently exist.