Tracking devices to cut car insurance rates

A new concept in determining auto insurance bills is coming to the state with the nation’s highest average rates: pay-as-you-drive.

For the first time, a New Jersey auto insurance company wants to equip cars with high-tech devices that constantly track motorists’ driving habits to determine how much they should pay.

Starting Aug. 8, Progressive Corp. will offer discounts to its 127,000 Garden State drivers if they install in their cars wireless devices that tell the insurer how many miles they drive, what time they’re out on the road, and how often and how fast they accelerate and hit the brakes.

The company is dangling 60 percent rate discounts for the best drivers. Those who quickly rev up or slam their brakes, however, could face surcharges as high as 9 percent.

New Jersey will be only the fifth state with the pay-as-you-drive devices offered by the insurer.

“This is definitely the wave of the future,” said Loretta Worter, vice president of the Insurance Information Institute. “More and more companies are getting on board with tracking devices, seeing they offer a lot of advantages to consumers.”

Supporters of the idea say it reduces traffic because drivers want to keep their miles down. They say it improves drivers’ safety habits and cuts air pollution. They also contend it’s fairer than other new ways to charge motorists, such as basing rates on motorists’ jobs, credit scores or level of education. But others worry the devices are akin to having Big Brother riding shotgun.

“It’s a good idea for some people. It’s not for everybody,” said Richard Hutchinson, general manager of usage-based insurance for Progressive. “People need to think about this in their own situation.”

The insurer does not use how fast motorists drive as one of its rating factors and the company does not rat out speeders to the police, Hutchinson said.

In other states, about one-third of the company’s customers have enrolled and they are saving about 10 to 15 percent. New Jersey drivers pay an average of $1,184 per car in auto insurance premiums — highest in the nation, according to the latest statistics.

Hutchinson said the company can offer discounts because drivers are safer when they know they’re being monitored. Motorists may quit the program at any time.

The pocket-sized sensors, with the wireless transmitting capability of cell phones, are plugged into onboard diagnostic ports in cars dating back to 1996 models. Each day, they signal to Progressive computers about miles driven, when drivers are on the road and how they brake or accelerate.

“We’re supportive of a method that actually looks at miles driven,” said Stephen Carrellas, representative of the New Jersey chapter of the National Motorists Association. “Basically, the more you drive, the more you have a chance to be in an accident.”

J. Robert Hunter, director of insurance for the Consumer Federation of America, said he generally views “pay-as-you-drive” insurance plans as good for motorists but worries that tracking what time they drive could penalize low-income drivers working late-night shifts.

A recent Brookings Institution study found that if all drivers paid for insurance based on miles driven, overall driving would drop 8 percent in the nation and 13.5 percent in New Jersey. It would reduce total carbon emissions by about 2 percent, the study found.

“Going easy on the peddle and easy on the brakes not only helps safety, but also the environment,” said Mike Replogle, transportation director for the Environmental Defense Fund.

But Charles Samuelson, executive director of the ACLU of Minnesota, a state where the device is used, worries about privacy.

“We see this as kind of a creeping abduction of people’s data,” he said. “Basically, once they collect that data, it belongs to the insurance company. That’s a big problem.”

Progressive’s Hutchinson admits privacy has been a concern since the program started with a pilot project in 1999. He said the devices do not include GPS locators that would enable the company to track every movement. “The primary concern that comes up is: ‘Are you tracking my whereabouts?’” he said.

Just like car owners with EZ-Pass toll transponders, drivers with computers may obtain access to all monitoring data online and see how they compare with others in the state, he said. While the data is subject to subpoenas or court orders, so far the company hasn’t received any. The company does not sell the data to third-party marketers.

Allstate, New Jersey’s second largest insurer, is testing devices that monitor traffic and attempt to avoid accidents. A few other companies that do not do business in New Jersey also electronically track driving behavior.

We’ve found Ernie a pleasure to speak with, he’s down to earth, easy going and a true professional. Get an insurance quote here

Ernie’s Office is located at the Lincoln Street Business Center in downtown Tullahoma; 101 West Lincoln Street, Suite 106 – across the street from Clayton Shoe Store and the Veranda House. Office hours are Monday through Friday, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.; with evening and weekend hours by appointment only. To speak with Ernie about personal auto and home insurance, contact him at (931) 455-0504, send an email to ehobbs@metlife.com, or visit MetLife Auto & Home’s Tennessee web site at www.hobbsinsurance.metlife.com or his new site at TullahomaInsuranceAgent.com.

Ernie is pleased to provide excellent services to clients in Shelbyville, Manchester, Tullahoma, Decherd, Estill Springs, McMinnville, Lavergne, Murfreesboro, Franklin, Spring Hill and Thompsons Station. If you are in Bedford, Coffee, Lincoln, Franklin, Rutherford or Williamson county and looking for insurance, Ernie would love to help.

Ernie’s product lines include preferred Auto and Homeowners insurance, Non-standard homeowner (H03) insurance, renters, condominium, flood insurance etc. and he can even handle mobile or manufactured homes.

His vehicle coverage include RVs antique cars, street rods, boats, yachts, personal watercraft, off road vehicles, classic cars, motorcycles and even your family’s Surburban or good old Ford F150.

Ernie is a Metlife agent, but also sells progressive, RLI, sentry, Chubb, AIG, The Hartford, Travelers and American Modern.

* All states and the District of Columbia have adopted 21 as the legal drinking age.

* All states have more stringent restrictions for drivers under the age of 21, ranging from zero tolerance to a limit of 0.02 BAC.

* A death is considered alcohol-related when any person involved in the accident had some measure of alcohol in his or her blood, even if it was below the legal limit.

* There is an alcohol-related traffic death in the United States every 30 minutes and an injury every 2 minutes.

* In 2006, 17,602 traffic deaths were alcohol-related, up slightly from 17,590 in 2005.

* In 2006, 41 percent of all traffic fatalities were alcohol-related, up from 40 percent in 2005.

* A major factor in the long-term downward trend in alcohol-related fatalities is the enactment, beginning in the 1980s, of state laws designed to deter drunk driving such as:

– Requiring persons to be at least 21 years old before they can purchase alcohol

– Mandatory drivers license revocation when a driver’s BAC level is above the state’s legal limit

– Lowering the legal BAC level to 0.08

– Prohibiting open containers of alcoholic beverages in motor vehicles

– Increasing measures to prevent underage drivers from obtaining alcohol

– Canceling the vehicle registration of drivers who have had their licenses suspended or revoked due to alcohol-related offenses

– Instituting sobriety checkpoints

Here is a breakdown of how states treat drunk driving violations:

(1) On-the-spot drivers license suspension or revocation if BAC is over the legal limit or the driver refuses to take a BAC test.
(2) Mandatory penalty for violation of the implied consent law, which means that drivers who refuse to take a breath alcohol test when stopped or arrested for drunk driving will have their license revoked or suspended.
(3) Prohibits unsealed alcohol containers in motor vehicle passenger compartments for all occupants. Arresting officer not required to witness consumption.
(4) Applies only to the driver.
(5) With limitations or conditions.
(6) Not specifically for drunk driving; Attorney General has established a no plea bargain policy.
(7) Administrative license suspension lasts until prosecution is complete.

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; Insurance Institute for Highway Safety; Property Casualty Insurers Association of America; Insurance Information Institute.

Increased reliance on cell phones has led to a rise in the number of people who use the devices while driving. There are two dangers associated with driving and cell-phone use, including text messaging. First, drivers must take their eyes off the road while dialing. Second, people can become so absorbed in their conversations that their ability to concentrate on the act of driving is severely impaired, jeopardizing the safety of vehicle occupants and pedestrians. Since the first law was passed in New York in 2001 banning hand-held cell-phone use while driving, there has been debate as to the exact nature and degree of hazard. The latest research shows that while using a cell phone when driving may not be the most dangerous distraction, because it is so prevalent it is by far the most common cause of this type of crash and near crash.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

* Studies: Studies about cell-phone use while driving have focused on several different aspects of the problem. Some have looked at its prevalence as the leading cause of driver distraction. Others have looked at the different risks associated with hand-held and hands-free devices. Still others have focused on the seriousness of injuries in crashes involving cell-phone users and the demographics of drivers who use cell phones. Below is a summary of some recent research on the issue.

* In July 2007 the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and the National Center for Statistics and Analysis released the results of their National Occupant Protection Use Survey (NOPUS), which found that in 2006 5 percent of drivers used hand-held cell phones, down from 6 percent in 2005, the first decline since the survey began tracking hand-held cell phone use in 2000. The decline in use occurred in a number of driver categories, including female drivers (down from 8 to 6 percent), drivers in the Midwest (down from 8 to 4 percent), drivers age 25 to 69 (down from 6 to 4 percent) and drivers of passenger cars (down from 6 to 4 percent) to name but a few. NOPUS is a probability-based observational survey. Data on driver cell-phone use were collected at random stop signs or stoplights only while vehicles were stopped and only during daylight hours.

* A survey of dangerous driver behavior was released in January 2007 by Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. The survey of 1,200 drivers found that 73 percent talk on cell phones while driving. Cell phone use was highest among young drivers.

* Text messaging, or “texting” by teens, a driving distraction related to cell phone use, was the subject of an August 2006 Teens Today survey conducted by the Liberty Mutual Research Institute for Safety and Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD). The survey showed that teens considered sending text messages via cell phones to be their biggest distraction. Of the teens surveyed, 37 percent said that text messaging was extremely or very distracting, while 20 percent said that they were distracted by their emotional states and 19 percent said that having friends in the car was distracting. The January 2007 survey by Nationwide found that 19 percent of motorists say they text message while driving.

* Motorists who use cell phones while driving are four times as likely to get into crashes serious enough to injure themselves, according to a study of drivers in Perth, Australia, conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. The results, published in July 2005, suggest that banning hand-held phone use won’t necessarily improve safety if drivers simply switch to hand-free phones. The study found that injury crash risk didn’t vary with type of phone.

* Many studies have shown that using hand-held cell phones while driving can constitute a hazardous distraction. However, the theory that hands-free sets are safer has been challenged by the findings of several studies. A study from researchers at the University of Utah, published in the summer 2006 issue of Human Factors, the quarterly journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, concludes that talking on a cell phone while driving is as dangerous as driving drunk, even if the phone is a hands-free model. An earlier study by researchers at the university found that motorists who talked on hands-free cell phones were 18 percent slower in braking and took 17 percent longer to regain the speed they lost when they braked.

* A September 2004 study from the NHTSA found that drivers using hand-free cell phones had to redial calls 40 percent of the time, compared with 18 percent for drivers using hand-held sets, suggesting that hands-free sets may provide drivers with a false sense of ease.

* A study released in April 2006 found that almost 80 percent of crashes and 65 percent of near-crashes involved some form of driver inattention within three seconds of the event. The study, The 100-Car Naturalistic Driving Study, conducted by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), breaks new ground. (Earlier research found that driver inattention was responsible for 25 to 30 percent of crashes.) The new study found that the most common distraction is the use of cell phones, followed by drowsiness. However, cell-phone use is far less likely to be the cause of a crash or near-miss than other distractions, according to the study. For example, while reaching for a moving object such as a falling cup increased the risk of a crash or near-crash by nine times, talking or listening on a hand-held cell phone only increased the risk by 1.3 times. The study tracked the behavior of the 241 drivers of 100 vehicles for more than one year. The drivers were involved in 82 crashes, 761 near-crashes and 8,295 critical incidents.

* These findings confirm an August 2003 report from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety that concluded that drivers are far less distracted by their cell phones than by other common activities, such as reaching for items on the seat or glove compartment or talking to passengers. That study was based on the analysis of videotapes from cameras installed in the vehicles of 70 drivers in North Carolina and Pennsylvania.

* State and Federal Initiatives: The number of state legislatures debating measures that address the problem of cell-phone use while driving and other driver distractions continues to rise. As of March 2008 four states — Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Utah — plus the District of Columbia had laws on the books banning the use of hand-held cell phones while driving. Similar laws in California and Washington State go into effect in July 2008. Except for Utah and Washington State, the laws are all “primary enforcement,” meaning a motorist may be ticketed for using a hand-held cell phone while driving without any other traffic offense taking place.

* About 17 states have passed laws banning or restricting young drivers from using cell phones. The most recent state to enact such legislation is California. But the California law goes farther than any other state’s. It bans the use of any mobile device by drivers under age 18. This includes a cell phone, a broadband personal communication device, specialized mobile radio device, handheld device or laptop computer.

* In May 2007 Washington become the first state to ban the practice of texting with a cell phone while driving; New Jersey passed a similar law that took effect on March 1, 2008. In Washington, the fine for DWT (driving while texting) is set at $101, but since it is a secondary offense a driver must be pulled over for some more grievous infraction before the penalty can be imposed. In New Jersey the fine for DWT is $100, but the state has made the offense one of primary enforcement (see above). In Connecticut drivers can be fined $100 not only for using a cell phone, but those pulled over for speeding or other moving violations can be fined for other driving distractions such as putting on makeup or turning to discipline children in the back seat. In New York, the first state to enact such legislation, in 2001, drivers face fines of $100 for the first violation, $200 for the second and $500 thereafter.

* Businesses: Businesses are increasingly prohibiting workers from using cell phones while driving to conduct business. Exxon Mobil and Shell are examples of large companies that ban employees’ use of any type of cell phone while driving during work hours. The California Association of Employers recommends that employers develop a cell phone policy that requires employees to pull off the road before conducting business by cell phone.

* Court Decisions: In December 2007 International Paper Co. agreed to pay a $5.2 million settlement to a Georgia woman who was rear-ended by one of its employees. The employee was driving a company car and talking on a company cell phone at the time of the accident. The settlement was reached even though the employee had violated her company’s policy of requiring the use of hands-free headsets while driving. The suit is among the most recent of several cases where an employer has been held liable for an accident caused by a driver using a cell phone. (See background section on Employer and Manufacturer Liability.)

BACKGROUND

Cell phones play an integral role in our society. However, the convenience they offer must be judged against the hazards they pose. Inattentive driving accounted for 6.4 percent of crash fatalities in 2003—the latest data available—according to the U.S. Department of Transportation. Inattentive driving includes talking, eating, putting on make up and attending to children. Using cell phones and other wireless or electronic units are also considered distractions.

As many as 40 countries may restrict or prohibit the use of cell phones while driving. Countries reported to have laws related to cell phone use include Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Botswana, Chile, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Norway, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Singapore, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Turkmenistan, the United Kingdom and Zimbabwe. Most countries prohibit the use of hand-held phones while driving. Drivers in the Czech Republic, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom may use cell phones but can be fined if they are involved in crashes while using the phone. Drivers in the United Kingdom and Germany also can lose insurance coverage if they are involved in a crash while talking on the phone.

Supporters of restrictions on driving while using a cell phone say that the distractions associated with cell phone use while driving are far greater than other distractions. Conversations using a cell phone demand greater continuous concentration, which diverts the driver’s eyes from the road and his mind from driving. Opponents of cell phone restrictions say drivers should be educated about the effects of all driver distractions. They also say that existing laws that regulate driving should be more strictly enforced.

Employer and Manufacturer Liability: Although only a handful of high-profile cases have gone to court, employers are still concerned that they might be held liable for accidents caused by their employees while driving and conducting work-related conversations on cell phones. Under the doctrine of vicarious responsibility, employers may be held legally accountable for the negligent acts of employees committed in the course of employment. Employers may also be found negligent if they fail to put in place a policy for the safe use of cell phones. In response, many companies have established cell phone usage policies. Some allow employees to conduct business over the phone as long as they pull over to the side of the road or into a parking lot. Others have completely banned the use of all wireless devices.

In an article published in the June 2003 edition of the North Dakota Law Review, attorney Jordan Michael proposed a theory of cell phone manufacturer liability for auto accidents if they fail to warn users of the dangers of driving and talking on the phone at the same time. The theory holds that maker liability would be similar to the liability of employers who encourage or demand cell phone use on the road. Holding manufacturers liable would cover all persons who drive and use cell phones for personal calls. Michael notes that some car rental agencies have already placed warnings on embedded cell phones in their cars.

In the meantime, here are the minimal amounts you need in place not to end up in jail.

We always feel a little uncomfortable listing legal requirements on a webpage. What happens when this page gets archived, the laws change and someone finds it on a google search 10 years from now. Hate to be the source of bad data. So, keep in mind that the numbers here are from the insurance information institute and were accurate as of mid 2008.

(1) The first two numbers refer to bodily injury liability limits and the third number to property liability. For example, 20/40/10 means coverage up to $40,000 for all persons injured in an accident, subject to a limit of $20,000 for one individual, and $10,000 coverage for property damage.
(2) Low-cost policy limits for low-income drivers in the California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan are 10/20/3.
(3) Instead of policy limits, policyholders can satisfy the requirement with a combined single limit policy. Amounts vary by state.
(4) In addition, policyholders must also carry at least $1,000 for medical payments.
(5) May be waived for the policyholder but is compulsory for passengers.
(6) Basic policy (optional) limits are 10/10/5. Uninsured and under insured motorist coverage not available under the basic policy but uninsured motorist coverage is required under the standard policy.
(7) In addition, policyholders must have 50/100 for wrongful death coverage.

*Minimum coverage requirements will increase to 30/60/30 on January 1, 2011.

Source: Property Casualty Insurers Association of America; state departments of insurance.

There is a big difference between an insurance company canceling a policy and choosing not to renew it. Insurance companies cannot cancel a policy that has been in force for more than 60 days except when:

* You fail to pay the premium
* You have committed fraud or made serious misrepresentations on your application
* Your driver’s license has been revoked or suspended.

Nonrenewal is a different matter. Either you or your insurance company can decide not to renew the policy when it expires. Depending on the state you live in, your insurance company must give you a certain number of days notice and explain the reason for not renewing before it drops your policy. If you think the reason is unfair or want a further explanation, call the insurance company’s consumer affairs division. If you don’t get a satisfactory explanation, call your state insurance department.

The company may have decided to drop that particular line of insurance or to write fewer policies where you live, so the nonrenewal decision may not be because of something you did. On the other hand, if you did do something that raised the insurance company’s risk considerably, like driving drunk, the premium may rise or you may not have your policy renewed.

If your insurance company did not renew your policy, you will not necessarily be charged a higher premium at another insurance company.

Stay under the radar:

• 1) Drive within 5-10 mph of surrounding traffic. Police usually look for drivers going noticeably faster than the other cars on the road. If you’re within a pack of cars all going 5 to 10 mph over the limit, you’ve automatically improved your odds of not being the one that gets pulled over for a speeding ticket, even though you’re all speeding. The cop has to pick one car; if you go with the flow of traffic, it probably won’t be you. And it definitely won’t be you if you don’t speed in the first place.
• 2) Try to stay in the middle of the pack. If you’re the lead car, logic says you’ll be the first car to run past any cop’s radar trap up ahead and get a speeding ticket. And if you’re the last car, you’ll be the one the police officer rolls up behind. The safest place is in the middle — like a gazelle fleeing a hungry lion by seeking safety in the middle of the herd.
• 3) Find a “rabbit.” If you can’t find a pack of cars going the speed you’d like to maintain, the next best thing is to find yourself a rabbit — a solitary driver traveling the speed you’d like to drive that you can follow discretely, about 50-100 yards back. If there’s a cop using radar, hopefully the rabbit will trip the trap and get a speeding ticket, not you. And if he brakes suddenly, you have just received your early warning in time to take defensive action.
• 4) Do not change lanes frequently, tailgate or otherwise drive aggressively. In addition to being rude and dangerous, you’re just asking for a trucker or someone with a cell phone to call the cops and give them a description of your vehicle and license plate number. Always use your signals and be courteous to fellow drivers. It’s safer, and it will help you fade into the background.
• 5) Avoid the fast lane. Use the far left lane to pass when necessary, but try to stay in the middle lanes when possible. Reason? If a cop is lurking in a cutout along the median strip (or coming at you from the opposite direction on a divided highway) the speeder in the far left lane is the one most likely to become the target. Drivers who get nailed with speeding tickets are often the type who rack it up to 10 or 15 over the limit and remain in the far left lane.
• 6) Watch for cutouts and modulate your speed accordingly. On many highways, there are cutouts in the median strip every couple of miles. Usually, you can see these in plenty of time to slow down a little bit in case there’s a cop lurking behind the bushes ready to give you a speeding ticket.

Compare Cars

• 7) Don’t speed when you are the only car on the road. If you ignore this warning it’s the equivalent of plastering a “ticket me!” bumper sticker on your vehicle. Even if you’re only doing five mph over the posted limit, if there’s a cop using radar, he’s got nothing to look at but you. Lonesome speeding is even more dangerous in small towns, where radar traps and aggressive enforcement by cops can be common. And never speed late at night. Drunk-driving patrols are heavy and cops are more inclined to pull you over for any offense in order to check you for signs of alcohol. Don’t give them a reason.
• 8 ) If it’s OK legally, get a radar detector. Yes, they’re expensive (good ones, anyhow). But a one-time hit of, say, $300 for a decent radar detector is cheaper than even a single big speeding ticket and the higher insurance costs that will come with it. Radar detectors are legal in most states and well worth the investment to avoid a speeding ticket.

If they don’t see you, they won’t ticket you

• 9) If possible, drive a nondescript vehicle. It may not be fair, but it’s human nature to notice things that stand out from the crowd. Bright-colored cars, those with loud exhaust or other pimped-out enhancements are the cars more likely to draw a cop’s initial attention than ordinary-looking, family-type cars. Since the cop has to single out one car, which car do you suppose is the likely candidate for a speeding ticket? The bright yellow Mustang GT with 20-inch chrome rims? Or the silver Taurus?

Power and Performance

• 10) If you do get pulled over while driving a fancy, high-profile car, your odds of getting a speeding ticket versus a warning have probably gone up. If you’re driving a fast-looking hot rod, the cop is going to assume you use it and deserve a ticket more than the guy in a family-looking ride whose plea that he “didn’t realize he was speeding, officer” comes off as more believable.

  Appearances matter. That is, your appearance. If your appearance says, “Responsible member of the community,” you’re apt to get a more friendly response than if you look and act like trouble.

The worst possible thing you can do is combine all the no-no’s listed above by driving a flashy car too fast, late at night when you’re the only car on the road while looking like you just robbed a bank.

If you do that, expect a speeding ticket. And expect no mercy.

If you’ve financed your car, your lender may require comprehensive and collision insurance as part of the loan agreement.

Below is an example of the state minimum limits for auto liability insurance. The first number refers to liability limits for bodily injury for any one person, the second to limits for all persons injured, and the third refers to property damage liability limits. For example, 20/40/10 means coverage up to $40,000 for all persons injured in an accident, subject to a limit of $20,000 for one individual and $10,000 coverage for property damage.

State	Insurance required	Minimum liability limits (1)
Alabama	BI & PD Liab	20/40/10
Alaska	BI & PD Liab	50/100/25
Arizona	BI & PD Liab	15/30/10
Arkansas	BI & PD Liab, PIP	25/50/25
California	BI & PD Liab	15/30/5 (2)
Colorado	BI & PD Liab	25/50/15
Connecticut	BI & PD Liab, UM, UIM	20/40/10
Delaware	BI & PD Liab, PIP	15/30/10
D.C.	BI & PD Liab, UM	25/50/10
Florida	PD Liab, PIP	10/20/10 (3)
Georgia	BI & PD Liab	25/50/25
Hawaii	BI & PD Liab, PIP	20/40/10
Idaho	BI & PD Liab	25/50/15
Illinois	BI & PD Liab, UM	20/40/15
Indiana	BI & PD Liab	25/50/10
Iowa	BI & PD Liab	20/40/15
Kansas	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM	25/50/10
Kentucky	BI & PD Liab, PIP	25/50/10
Louisiana	BI & PD Liab	10/20/10
Maine	BI & PD Liab, UM, UIM	50/100/25 (4)
Maryland	BI & PD Liab, PIP (5), UM	20/40/15
Massachusetts	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM	20/40/5
Michigan	BI & PD Liab, PIP	20/40/10
Minnesota	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM, UIM	30/60/10
Mississippi	BI & PD Liab	25/50/25
Missouri	BI & PD Liab, UM	25/50/10
Montana	BI & PD Liab	25/50/10
Nebraska	BI & PD Liab	25/50/25
Nevada	BI & PD Liab	15/30/10
New Hampshire	FR only, UM	25/50/25
New Jersey	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM	15/30/5 (6)
New Mexico	BI & PD Liab	25/50/10
New York	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM	25/50/10 (7)
North Carolina	BI & PD Liab	30/60/25
North Dakota	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM	25/50/25
Ohio	BI & PD Liab	12.5/25/7.5
Oklahoma	BI & PD Liab	25/50/25
Oregon	BI & PD Liab, PIP, UM	25/50/10
Pennsylvania	BI & PD Liab, PIP	15/30/5
Rhode Island	BI & PD Liab, UM	25/50/25 (3)
South Carolina	BI & PD Liab, UM	25/50/25
South Dakota	BI & PD Liab, UM	25/50/25
Tennessee	BI & PD Liab	25/50/10 (3)
Texas	BI & PD Liab	25/50/25*
Utah	BI & PD Liab, PIP	25/50/15 (3)
Vermont	BI & PD Liab, UM, UIM	25/50/10
Virginia	BI & PD Liab, UM	25/50/20
Washington	BI & PD Liab	25/50/10
West Virginia	BI & PD Liab, UM	20/40/10
Wisconsin	FR only, UM	25/50/10
Wyoming	BI & PD Liab	25/50/20

1.  The first two numbers refer to bodily injury liability limits and the third number to property liability.  For example, 20/40/10 means coverage up to $40,000 for all persons injured in an accident, subject to a limit of $20,000 for one individual, and $10,000 coverage for property damage.
2. Low-cost policy limits for low-income drivers in the California Automobile Assigned Risk Plan are 10/20/3.
3. Instead of policy limits, policyholders can satisfy the requirement with a combined single limit policy. Amounts vary by state.
4. In addition, policyholders must also carry at least $1,000 for medical payments.
5. May be waived for the policyholder but is compulsory for passengers.
6. Basic policy (optional) limits are 10/10/5. Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverge not available under the basic policy but uninsured motorist coverage is required under the standard policy.
7. In addition, policyholders must have 50/100 for wrongful death coverage.

*Minimum coverage requirements will increase to 30/60/30 on January 1, 2011.

Source: Property Casualty Insurers Association of America; state departments of insurance.

© Insurance Information Institute, Inc. – ALL RIGHTS RESERVED