Page 1 of 11 12345678910 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 101

Thread: Michigan no fault reform bill

  1. #1
    Senior Member bigtop1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Greater metropolitan Detroit area
    Posts
    362

    Michigan no fault reform bill

    The state of Michigan has introduced a bill to reform or terminate the no fault insurance coverage to people who have been permanently injured. Until now, the insurance companies would cover expenses related to the victims of an accident. There would be no grandfathering in those already recieving assistance. I have been one of those benefiting. I am concerned. I am scared. I don't know how this will all turn out but, I am sure it will not be good. Can anyone give me some advice on how and what you may do to recieve assistance in your care, supplies, nursing care, etc.. The bill I am referring to is the Michigan house bill 4936 or, HB4936.
    I refuse to tip toe through life, only to arrive safely at death.

  2. #2
    Senior Member medic1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    New London, WI USA
    Posts
    1,144
    I will be following this too as I receive benefits under the no-fault. I can't see how they would cut us all off when we paid in to those benefits all along and continue to do so today. Its wrong to take away benefits we are relying on. If they want to change it they should at least have to continue to pay to those who already receive benefits. They are crying now cause they say they dont have any money. Really???? most of my benefits is covered by work comp and they have very little they pay on my behalf. We pay outrageous vehicle insurance in Michigan and now they want to take everything away from us?? Ugh I get so mad! What do those of us do that rely on these benefits do?? Isnt that like paying for a lifetime membership and then months later the business goes defunct and we are out the membership with no remedy or refund????

  3. #3
    Senior Member bigtop1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Greater metropolitan Detroit area
    Posts
    362
    Medic one,........May I suggest that you send an email to your state senator advising him to vote on the bill in favor of the people who have needed it in the past.
    I refuse to tip toe through life, only to arrive safely at death.

  4. #4
    Michigan's MCCA is a horribly unfair program that, like most redistribution programs, ends up disproportionally taxing those who can least afford it (such as disabled and low income). The reason is that it is based solely on vehicle ownership. Every vehicle owned costs an extra $150/yr. But ownership has nothing to do with use. Many poor people own multiple vehicles out of necessity. When you drive old junkers you need a backup to have reliable transportation for work.

    In our case we go without collision coverage on our handicap van because the cost is so high. That's a huge risk since the van would cost about $10K to replace. The van only gets used about once a week or so when I need to transport my wife to appointments or shopping. The last thing I want to do is drive a 15 year old van that gets 12 mpg city to work. And it makes economic sense to keep the van out of the salt as much as possible to prolong it's life. I already pay a full MCCA premium on my daily commuter. The extra MCCA alone on the van amounts to a tax of 10 cents/mile for those disabled transport miles.

    I am a long time car enthusiast but I'm ready to sell my old cars. I haven't driven either one in several years because I don't want to pay $300/yr for MCCA. Lest you think I am rich, the two of them together are barely worth $5000. Oddly enough, motorcycles owners don't pay the tax. Yet, they are the drivers most likely to be seriously injured on the road.

    The reality is Michigan is brutal to the working class. Thanks to our one wimpy turd, my wife will probably be paying MI income taxes on her Social Security now while rich pensioners continue to enjoy tax-free retirement and grandfathered low property taxes. Age apparently has its entitlement. At the same time, the tax assessor thinks our house is much more than average because it's accessible. The same assessor refuses to acknowledge the law that allows for property tax reduction for the disabled. Should I die or be injured, they will eagerly take 1/3 of her SS check for property taxes. The goal is apparently to drive the disabled out of their homes where they might be able to support themselves and into taxpayer funded long-term care facilities.

    Many may feel the MCCA program is worth it, and put up examples of specific people it helps, but it comes at the expense of many people who are worse off than the beneficiaries. I personally know of someone collecting twice from MCCA what my wife gets from SS for a closed head injury. His brain functions the same of anyone else, has no physical injuries, needs no special care at all, and he never has to work again. The only difference was he was in a single car accident instead of being unlucky enough to contract a random disease.

    Still my wife is lucky. Had she not been able to work long enough to qualify for social security, we would have been bankrupted long ago and she would would have been institutionalized. Twenty years in and I know we need to get divorced if I am going to have any chance at retirement myself. The law ultimately punishes those who stick by their spouses and save the taxpayers about a million dollars for every 10 years they keep them out of long term care.

    What we need is non-discriminatory help for the disabled. Not preferential programs for people who are injured at work, in a car accident, or at the liability of someone with deep pockets. As for the MCCA, if it can't be changed to tax only once per driver it needs to go.

  5. #5
    I worked as a vocational rehab counselor for many years in Michigan. Although I was not directly connected to the no fault program we were proud of what it could do to assist people w disabilities and felt it was a model for other states. I know several people whose homes were completely renovated for accessibility through this program, of another who received payment for an overhead track system to enable transfers from the bed, to the bathroom, etc. It pays for education and retraining on a lifelong basis and as disabled people age helps them w more assistive devices to make life easier. In the case of those who need it the program will even pay for all necessary personal assistant costs. All of this without the disabled person needing to be impoverished before help could be made available through Medicaid. I know for certain this program has kept many out of nursing homes and the nursing home is likely where they will be headed when Michigan politicians abolish it. Imo, the destruction of no fault is a corporate favor for big campaign contributors, those who are waiting to receive the big savings obtained at the cost of this program will be waiting forever as I believe 90% of the savings obtained will find their way into the paychecks of corporate bigwigs and perhaps pay some dividends for stockholders.

  6. #6
    I don't know anything about this BUT I would almost bet it's been the Republican party that has come up with this!

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by duge View Post
    I don't know anything about this BUT I would almost bet it's been the Republican party that has come up with this!
    You are so right Duge.

    Art
    Art

  8. #8
    Every state should have no fault.

    Name removed.. concedes that until recently she gave little thought — none, really — to Michigan’s no-fault auto insurance law and its guarantee of unlimited, lifetime coverage for those severely injured in auto accidents.

    She thinks about it a lot now.

    So did I after I got hurt.

    That’s because the morning of Sept. 18, 2010, on her way to a University of Michigan football game, her life changed forever. On rain-slicked pavement, the driver of her SUV lost control. The vehicle rolled several times, and she was thrown out and against a tree.

    Of the six occupants, she was the most seriously injured. She suffered multiple rib fractures, three broken vertebrae, a broken shoulder and clavicle, and a skull fracture. She is paralyzed below the waist, likely never will walk again and always will need some level of care. She had to relearn to talk, eat, even think. More than a year later, she is undergoing multiple kinds of therapy five days a week. The cost — so far — exceeds $1 million, she said, all of it covered by her auto insurance.

    MSWIFE...God forbid you be stoped at a light and get rearended and really get hurt...you would be glad you had no fault and so would I.

    Michigan motorists pay the 11th highest rate for auto insurance in the nation.

    But we have the best pip in the country....not bad for $145.00 MCCA a year.

    Here is the problem like in Detriot right now 50 percent of the drivers do not have ins.

    Right now you pay your MCCA at the time you buy your ins. so you can get your plates then they cancel there ins. and get back most of that 145.00.

    Here is my easy two fixes and lower the MCCA a lot IMO.

    #1 You pay your $145.00 at the time you buy your plates and then if you cancel your ins. you do not get it back=more money in the MCCA fund which would bring down the MCCA price.
    Which is how it should have been done from the start.

    #2 The DMV knows you have droped your ins. and you must return the plate or pay a fine and court cost for them going after you.

    I have wrote....email...and called all my Congress people in my area about this several times.

    Ins. company tried this back in 1992 and 1994 and it went down 62 to 38 by the peoples vote.

    Now this time the ins. put in a 50,000 appropriation so WE THE PEOPLE CAN NOT VOTE on it.

    I pay $720.00 a year for house ins. for what?....cause you never know what will happen.

    Same thing with no fault.

    BTW Car ins. companys in Michigan have had record profits year after year including 2011 and 2012.

    I think its time they gave back to Michigan.

    It was going up for a vote Nov. 15th or 17th till congess found out they were lied to by the ins. co.saying MCCA has gone up by 2500 percent....which in reality it went up only 8 percent in the ins. time table.....which is just there way to get what they want.

    It is our understanding some providers and families are coming up on both Wednesday and Thursday to have a rally opposing the bill. While this rally is not being coordinated nor organized by CPAN these individuals wish to continue to express their strong opposition to the proposal. We encourage those attending the rally to stay on the same message and remain respectful of individuals and the process, there is no down side to this advocacy.


    Today, in over 13 voting precincts around the state, volunteers passed out the attached It's About the People flyer about auto no-fault. The goal: to better inform people on this issue. Thank you to all the volunteers. Initial comments from those working at the polls were that the majority of people were upset with the bill on several points.

    I could go on and on here....more info if u google...CPAN MICHIGAN NO FAULT...

    Art
    Art

  9. #9
    This update is brought to you from the Brain Injury Association of Michigan and the Michigan Brain Injury Providers Council, which are both leaders in the Coalition Protecting Auto No-Fault.

    Despite rumors that Rep.....removed.... was going to push for movement on HB 4936 prior to the fall recess that starts today, there was no action taken. Several insurance lobbyists were hanging around outside the chambers but were working the House Republican Caucus members prior to their caucus meeting yesterday on auto no-fault reforms. We also provided caucus members with questions to ask during the meeting. By a few caucus members' accounts, the meeting did not go well for the auto insurers. They brought into the meeting Insurance Commissioner....removed.... and Chief Deputy Commissioner of Policy....removed.... to address the MCCA sustainability issue. There was more confusion coming out of the meeting than going in and several members demanded transparency before moving this issue further. We believe rather than providing clarity and some assurance to members of the need for such significant reform, it might have moved some in the opposite direction.

    As stated in previous emails, CPAN's whip count (vote tally) has Rep.....removed... falling far short of having the necessary votes to pass the bill. He continues to work on a sub, but has yet to share anything with CPAN or its stakeholders. We expect Rep....removed.... and the industry will continue to have discussions but it's unclear as to when they will reach out to the other side.

    We anticipate that HB 4936 will be up for a vote in the House sometime during last three weeks of session Nov. 29 - Dec. 15th, and likely towards the end of the session.

    Art
    Art

  10. #10
    Senior Member medic1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    New London, WI USA
    Posts
    1,144
    Quote Originally Posted by MSspouse View Post
    Michigan's MCCA is a horribly unfair program that, like most redistribution programs, ends up disproportionally taxing those who can least afford it (such as disabled and low income). The reason is that it is based solely on vehicle ownership. Every vehicle owned costs an extra $150/yr. But ownership has nothing to do with use. Many poor people own multiple vehicles out of necessity. When you drive old junkers you need a backup to have reliable transportation for work.

    In our case we go without collision coverage on our handicap van because the cost is so high. That's a huge risk since the van would cost about $10K to replace. The van only gets used about once a week or so when I need to transport my wife to appointments or shopping. The last thing I want to do is drive a 15 year old van that gets 12 mpg city to work. And it makes economic sense to keep the van out of the salt as much as possible to prolong it's life. I already pay a full MCCA premium on my daily commuter. The extra MCCA alone on the van amounts to a tax of 10 cents/mile for those disabled transport miles.

    I am a long time car enthusiast but I'm ready to sell my old cars. I haven't driven either one in several years because I don't want to pay $300/yr for MCCA. Lest you think I am rich, the two of them together are barely worth $5000. Oddly enough, motorcycles owners don't pay the tax. Yet, they are the drivers most likely to be seriously injured on the road.

    The reality is Michigan is brutal to the working class. Thanks to our one wimpy turd, my wife will probably be paying MI income taxes on her Social Security now while rich pensioners continue to enjoy tax-free retirement and grandfathered low property taxes. Age apparently has its entitlement. At the same time, the tax assessor thinks our house is much more than average because it's accessible. The same assessor refuses to acknowledge the law that allows for property tax reduction for the disabled. Should I die or be injured, they will eagerly take 1/3 of her SS check for property taxes. The goal is apparently to drive the disabled out of their homes where they might be able to support themselves and into taxpayer funded long-term care facilities.

    Many may feel the MCCA program is worth it, and put up examples of specific people it helps, but it comes at the expense of many people who are worse off than the beneficiaries. I personally know of someone collecting twice from MCCA what my wife gets from SS for a closed head injury. His brain functions the same of anyone else, has no physical injuries, needs no special care at all, and he never has to work again. The only difference was he was in a single car accident instead of being unlucky enough to contract a random disease.

    Still my wife is lucky. Had she not been able to work long enough to qualify for social security, we would have been bankrupted long ago and she would would have been institutionalized. Twenty years in and I know we need to get divorced if I am going to have any chance at retirement myself. The law ultimately punishes those who stick by their spouses and save the taxpayers about a million dollars for every 10 years they keep them out of long term care.

    What we need is non-discriminatory help for the disabled. Not preferential programs for people who are injured at work, in a car accident, or at the liability of someone with deep pockets. As for the MCCA, if it can't be changed to tax only once per driver it needs to go.
    Really?? So those who get hurt on the job should just suck it up? I take offense to this as I was hurt on the job. I was working as a paramedic when the ambulance rolled and left me a paraplegic. I have been unable to work since. I was 23. Should I be punished for risking my life to save others with no compensation. How many jobs would go unfilled because people would be too afraid of getting hurt and not being able to afford care for themselves or family due to getting hurt on the job. My unique situaion also involves the auto ins. they pay very little in any of my care. Yet, they are supposed to be paying for my medical, they have shoved it off onto work comp. Even though there is no price cut for the auto insurance, they know that if anyone gets hurt in the ambulance the dont have to pay anything or pay very little. They make money hand over fist. I would really like to see the number of people they actually take care of for life from vehicle accidents. I am very thankful that I have both of these programs. I am sorry that the resources for your wife are limited. Both of my parents have polio, so I know it can be a struggle to live on a fixed income because of contracting a disease.

    Non-discriminatory care for the disabled....I think that is what Obama care would take care of.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •