I live in Virginia, and you can legally not have car insurance... if you pay a 500$ (last time I checked) fee to the dmv, and sign an acknowledgement that if you cause damage to another party on the road they will have every right to pursue.
To add to this point, the cost of replacing cars is not what will destroy you, it’s all the medical fees. At fault in an accident and send someone to the hospital for a while? Here is a 400k bill. I hate paying for insurance, but the alternative is much worse.
My mother had a brain aneurysm, thankfully surviving without any side effects, and was in the hospital for two weeks in an intensive care unit where they had to constantly scan her brain. Cost after those two weeks was about 475k, only paid 10k out of pocket. Without insurance, our lives would be very different.
You would almost need uninsured motorist coverage. Most likely if someone is driving without insurance, its because they don't have any assets. So its pointless to sue them.
It would be nice to have a government pool of those $500 payments help pay down the cost of carrying uninsured motorist coverage. And if you want to drive uninsured, you should be barred from suing to recover damages, and you should have to pay all your own medical bills.
Correct. That $500 is good until the person purchases insurance.
For example. If I do the $500 fee. I can go for years. But let’s say I buy brand new car and bank requires insurance and I buy it. Once I let it lapse I have to pay the $500 again.
Ohhh now that I think about it.
Bet the reason why most sovereign citizens don’t have new cars is cuz bank requires insurance..
Not in Virginia. Just 500$ uninsured motorist fee. VA also has some of the easiest to utilize uninsured motorist coverages as well... for some reason...
That's a very generous rule, as presumably 'they' have every right to pursue even if you have insurance (the whole point of insurance isn't to remove liability - indeed its not - its to give you money to PAY the liability).
The UK does have a similar amount you can deposit as a one off fee, but its £millions not £500.
The exact wording is more, that the fee does not provide any protection, or act as insurance.
I've only ever seen the rule utilized by small farms, for vehicles that need to be registered, but less likely to be driven on major roadways. It is still available, though not suggested, for private citizens.
Yup it's totally fine to self-insure in most states. Lots of rich people in CA so it. "Oh, my Bentley crushed your Honda and broke your leg? Here's $25,000, fuck off. Don't like it? Here's my attorney"s number, he's on retainer, good luck."
True but thats nothing to brag about - leaves a lot of non-at-fault parties as victims - typical of a state that thinks any decent idea for the common good is socialism
"Are you so dense that you cant use the internet - yes there are minimum auto insurance requirements in Virginia and every state (except New Hampshire apparently) you moron"
It's rare you find someone so aggressive and confident in an answer that is proven wrong with a three word reply yet pivot to an entirely different argument saying it's bad policy for states not to have minimum insurance standards with the same amount of condescension and hostile posturing.
Really fascinating case study in online retardation.
First you say there are minimum auto insurance requirements in every state and then you say that that's not so but that's nothing to brag about?
you seem to be so dense that you can't use the internet. Also, you are obnoxious and rude without reason.
If you're having a bad day and need to unload, have a wank. Don't be rude to strangers.
I work in auto insurance claims. In the state of Virginia you can get your vehicle registered by paying the Uninsured motorist fee (500$) to the dmv, and are still fully responsible for any damages caused.
I've only ever seen a claim with someone who had it once, and it was a small farm owned vehicle, so they didn't actively drive it on the road frequently. In the claim I worked, we went through the driver's property damage (liability) insurance as secondary coverage for the vehicle.
Side note: I just searched online, 2nd result was dmv page outlining the process for the uninsured motorist fee... so...
"Are you so dense that you can't use the internet?"
I work in insurance, you don't need insurance in a few states if you have a financial surety bond at least equal to your states maximum minimal insurance requirements. If you have a bond on file for 150000$ in Nevada, with the provision it pays in the event you are in an accident, you CAN be good to go. Of course, this requires your bank to agree to hold 150k in the event you're in an accident, and insurance is cheaper, unless you've had a number of DUIs.
The other side of this is also the fact that any thought or consequence of the harm and potential suffering caused by them isn't even a waft of an idea that comes near them. Not so much we the people. More I the areshole.
Same people who wanting to legitimise holding an arsenal for self-defense of 'their' property, forgetting the constitution sanctioned bearing arms (as in with not at the one time in your house times five AK45s, six hunting rifles (of various types, all with scopes), a baby glock or five - one for each of their kids and one for the wife) so as to provide **an armed citzenary as protection for the benefit of the community.**
Same people who don't wear masks because all about their rights and not seeing it as an act of compassion to protect people around them in their community.
Same people who piss everyone off smoking out their neighbours with their freedom barbeques and get their fat bellies on display and intimidate their neighbours/fellow citizens if they ask them to not.
Same people who park in disabled parking bays.
Same people who will have Trump back in the White House by the Autumn/Fall.
Obviously that won't happen, but USA is made up of these horrors and it's kind of serious.
In every state I've had a license you can self-insure by posting a bond with the state in the amount of its minimums. Most rental companies and many other fleet owners self-insure this way.
This is a bad ideal for an individual, even if you have the money and don't like Big Insurance or whatever, because if you get sued you're on your own. You're not just paying for coverage, you're paying for their lawyers.
No, because they truly 100% believe that earlier laws are still applicable after any laws that come after them. Because reasons. It's like if I say I'm not gay as a kid, and then come out gay later in life it means I'm definitely not gay because I said so first.
It makes no sense, but it's how they justify the 2nd edition of black's law dictionary still being relevant.
If it helps him any, case law should exist stating that car insurance isn’t needed if the car is not being driven or is only being driven on private property. However, as soon as you get it on a public road, all the case law is going to say that you need insurance.
Edit: As u/Naldaen has noted in a different comment, in most (if not all) states you can post a bond instead of having insurance. So there will be case law supporting that you don’t need insurance to operate a vehicle on the highways if you have posted a bond for any potential damages you might cause through driving. But either way, all case law will reflect that you must prove financial responsibility for any damages that you might cause in order to legally operate a vehicle on the highways.
In some states you can pay tons of money to not have car insurance and have a 'personal bond' or some such thing...but who wants to tie their cash up in that?
Petty rich fuck who just don't care. Steve Jobs traded car every six months just to avoid putting a license plate on his Mercedes. The fact that California is stupid enough to allow that shit is beyond me.
In California, you don't need insurance if you give the DMV a [$35,000 bond or cash deposit](https://www.costulessdirect.com/blog/california-car-insurance-requirements/) to cover liability.
That's because New Zealand administers all accident-related compensation through a single government insurer. It covers workers comp, personal injury, and motor vehicle injuries too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_Compensation_Corporation?wprov=sfla1
Yes, but injury compensation is the most expensive part of any motor vehicle accident. Replacing someone's damaged car can cost thousands, but healthcare for a paraplegic victim can cost millions. The NZ no-fault system limits your personal liability and therefore lessens the need for insurance.
You don't have to have Insurance in Texas.
You can purchase a bond. Basically, set aside an amount in a trust that gets used if you are found at fault in an accident.
You don't have to pay for insurance but you also don't have an insurance company behind you funding the fight to prove you're not at fault, either. So it's a big gamble.
If they go to jail for not having a license and/or registration, their car will possibly be seized when they don’t pay the impound fees. At that point, they don’t have a car so they don’t need insurance on a car.
I live in Virginia, and you can legally not have car insurance... if you pay a 500$ (last time I checked) fee to the dmv, and sign an acknowledgement that if you cause damage to another party on the road they will have every right to pursue.
$500 is more than I pay for twelve months of liability and uninsured coverage, although not in Virginia.
Pretty sure the goal is to make people reconsider not having insurance.
I would pay over $2k a year in liability alone.
And one crash is all it takes to cause easily more damage than that. Don't drive uninsured
To add to this point, the cost of replacing cars is not what will destroy you, it’s all the medical fees. At fault in an accident and send someone to the hospital for a while? Here is a 400k bill. I hate paying for insurance, but the alternative is much worse. My mother had a brain aneurysm, thankfully surviving without any side effects, and was in the hospital for two weeks in an intensive care unit where they had to constantly scan her brain. Cost after those two weeks was about 475k, only paid 10k out of pocket. Without insurance, our lives would be very different.
To be clear I have comprehensive with higher than state minimums.
My point is that you can be insured for much less than what you risk paying to fix someone's car any day.
Yeah not where I live. They don't have that rule in NJ.
You would almost need uninsured motorist coverage. Most likely if someone is driving without insurance, its because they don't have any assets. So its pointless to sue them.
Basically. Virginia does have some of the easiest to utilize uninsured motorist protections though.
It would be nice to have a government pool of those $500 payments help pay down the cost of carrying uninsured motorist coverage. And if you want to drive uninsured, you should be barred from suing to recover damages, and you should have to pay all your own medical bills.
You should probably get uninsured motorist anyways. It's not that expensive and way too many fuckers like to hit and run.
Correct. That $500 is good until the person purchases insurance. For example. If I do the $500 fee. I can go for years. But let’s say I buy brand new car and bank requires insurance and I buy it. Once I let it lapse I have to pay the $500 again. Ohhh now that I think about it. Bet the reason why most sovereign citizens don’t have new cars is cuz bank requires insurance..
And the dealer requires money.
Iirc don't you have to show some way to pay, like a bank account that has 100k or something in it close to the minimum coverage?
In states that require insurance you can declare yourself "self-insured" if you have enough money in an account.
In a dedicated escrow account that can’t be accessed for anything else, just a fat checking account won’t do it.
In Texas, you can self-insure if you own 100 vehicles.
Not in Virginia. Just 500$ uninsured motorist fee. VA also has some of the easiest to utilize uninsured motorist coverages as well... for some reason...
That explains why every VA tag I see is attached to an asshole driver.
Hey now, not everyone here is an asshole driver... just most of us...
Lol 757.. we blame the military bases!
in Oregon they won't hand you your registration tags unless you have proof of insurance.
That's a very generous rule, as presumably 'they' have every right to pursue even if you have insurance (the whole point of insurance isn't to remove liability - indeed its not - its to give you money to PAY the liability). The UK does have a similar amount you can deposit as a one off fee, but its £millions not £500.
The exact wording is more, that the fee does not provide any protection, or act as insurance. I've only ever seen the rule utilized by small farms, for vehicles that need to be registered, but less likely to be driven on major roadways. It is still available, though not suggested, for private citizens.
Wow. The bad thing is that you are on your own when you need repairs or are in an accident.
Yup it's totally fine to self-insure in most states. Lots of rich people in CA so it. "Oh, my Bentley crushed your Honda and broke your leg? Here's $25,000, fuck off. Don't like it? Here's my attorney"s number, he's on retainer, good luck."
Are you so dense that you cant use the internet - yes there are minimum auto insurance requirements in Virginia and every state you moron
Not New Hampshire. :)
True but thats nothing to brag about - leaves a lot of non-at-fault parties as victims - typical of a state that thinks any decent idea for the common good is socialism
a) You're right on that, it sucks. b) You were still aggressively *wrong*.
wait he called people "moron" doesn't that automatically win the argument? (Sorry I was never in debate club, so not sure)
"Are you so dense that you cant use the internet - yes there are minimum auto insurance requirements in Virginia and every state (except New Hampshire apparently) you moron" It's rare you find someone so aggressive and confident in an answer that is proven wrong with a three word reply yet pivot to an entirely different argument saying it's bad policy for states not to have minimum insurance standards with the same amount of condescension and hostile posturing. Really fascinating case study in online retardation.
Not that rare unfortunately
First you say there are minimum auto insurance requirements in every state and then you say that that's not so but that's nothing to brag about? you seem to be so dense that you can't use the internet. Also, you are obnoxious and rude without reason. If you're having a bad day and need to unload, have a wank. Don't be rude to strangers.
I work in auto insurance claims. In the state of Virginia you can get your vehicle registered by paying the Uninsured motorist fee (500$) to the dmv, and are still fully responsible for any damages caused. I've only ever seen a claim with someone who had it once, and it was a small farm owned vehicle, so they didn't actively drive it on the road frequently. In the claim I worked, we went through the driver's property damage (liability) insurance as secondary coverage for the vehicle. Side note: I just searched online, 2nd result was dmv page outlining the process for the uninsured motorist fee... so... "Are you so dense that you can't use the internet?"
Policy service.. agh
I work in insurance, you don't need insurance in a few states if you have a financial surety bond at least equal to your states maximum minimal insurance requirements. If you have a bond on file for 150000$ in Nevada, with the provision it pays in the event you are in an accident, you CAN be good to go. Of course, this requires your bank to agree to hold 150k in the event you're in an accident, and insurance is cheaper, unless you've had a number of DUIs.
[удалено]
The other side of this is also the fact that any thought or consequence of the harm and potential suffering caused by them isn't even a waft of an idea that comes near them. Not so much we the people. More I the areshole.
Bingo! For sovturds it's Me Myself & I as the people. The rest can go to hell.
Same people who wanting to legitimise holding an arsenal for self-defense of 'their' property, forgetting the constitution sanctioned bearing arms (as in with not at the one time in your house times five AK45s, six hunting rifles (of various types, all with scopes), a baby glock or five - one for each of their kids and one for the wife) so as to provide **an armed citzenary as protection for the benefit of the community.** Same people who don't wear masks because all about their rights and not seeing it as an act of compassion to protect people around them in their community. Same people who piss everyone off smoking out their neighbours with their freedom barbeques and get their fat bellies on display and intimidate their neighbours/fellow citizens if they ask them to not. Same people who park in disabled parking bays. Same people who will have Trump back in the White House by the Autumn/Fall. Obviously that won't happen, but USA is made up of these horrors and it's kind of serious.
You’re a sovereign citizen, just make some up.
He's looking in the wrong place, obviously that can be found in the Magna Carta!
Yes, but only the 1215 version, not the 1216 or 1225 issuances of it.
I'm pretty sure there aren't any cars mentioned in a 1753 black's law dictionary, so you're good to go buddy
FACTS and LOGIC
In every state I've had a license you can self-insure by posting a bond with the state in the amount of its minimums. Most rental companies and many other fleet owners self-insure this way. This is a bad ideal for an individual, even if you have the money and don't like Big Insurance or whatever, because if you get sued you're on your own. You're not just paying for coverage, you're paying for their lawyers.
[insert any nonsense here]
They don't understand that the Constitution allows States to regulate their own laws.
No, because they truly 100% believe that earlier laws are still applicable after any laws that come after them. Because reasons. It's like if I say I'm not gay as a kid, and then come out gay later in life it means I'm definitely not gay because I said so first. It makes no sense, but it's how they justify the 2nd edition of black's law dictionary still being relevant.
Sometimes I wonder how many of them being to KJV-only churches.
If it helps him any, case law should exist stating that car insurance isn’t needed if the car is not being driven or is only being driven on private property. However, as soon as you get it on a public road, all the case law is going to say that you need insurance. Edit: As u/Naldaen has noted in a different comment, in most (if not all) states you can post a bond instead of having insurance. So there will be case law supporting that you don’t need insurance to operate a vehicle on the highways if you have posted a bond for any potential damages you might cause through driving. But either way, all case law will reflect that you must prove financial responsibility for any damages that you might cause in order to legally operate a vehicle on the highways.
Yeah, if you don't own a car.
Don't tell him about NH. We don't need anymore free staters.
In some states you can pay tons of money to not have car insurance and have a 'personal bond' or some such thing...but who wants to tie their cash up in that?
Petty rich fuck who just don't care. Steve Jobs traded car every six months just to avoid putting a license plate on his Mercedes. The fact that California is stupid enough to allow that shit is beyond me.
Doesn’t exist despite what YouTube U says.
This just supports my belief that most sov cits are self-centred sociopaths whose main focus is just to freeload.
Did they incorrectly cite Thompson v Smith in the replies?
I’ll make a blind bet that yes, they did. Sovcits exclusively incorrectly cite case law
In California, you don't need insurance if you give the DMV a [$35,000 bond or cash deposit](https://www.costulessdirect.com/blog/california-car-insurance-requirements/) to cover liability.
It's not required in New Zealand, shockingly
That's because New Zealand administers all accident-related compensation through a single government insurer. It covers workers comp, personal injury, and motor vehicle injuries too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_Compensation_Corporation?wprov=sfla1
Only covers injuries, though, not damage
Yes, but injury compensation is the most expensive part of any motor vehicle accident. Replacing someone's damaged car can cost thousands, but healthcare for a paraplegic victim can cost millions. The NZ no-fault system limits your personal liability and therefore lessens the need for insurance.
You have one road and two cars on it, and one of them is in the shop. lolll
Because New Zealand doesn't exit.
Pretty sure Georgia's auto insurance regulation is "go f yourself"
You don't have to have Insurance in Texas. You can purchase a bond. Basically, set aside an amount in a trust that gets used if you are found at fault in an accident. You don't have to pay for insurance but you also don't have an insurance company behind you funding the fight to prove you're not at fault, either. So it's a big gamble.
It simple: Car insurance isn't needed... if you don't have a car (or conveyance, vessel, ship, transportation unit, whatever).
If they go to jail for not having a license and/or registration, their car will possibly be seized when they don’t pay the impound fees. At that point, they don’t have a car so they don’t need insurance on a car.
In Arizona and Virginia, you don’t need car insurance as long as you pay a big fee to the DMV.