PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION Insurance Coverage Requirements for Motor Carriers [34 Pa.B. 4661] Public Meeting held
August 5, 2004Commissioners Present: Terrance J. Fitzpatrick, Chairperson; Robert K. Bloom, Vice Chairperson; Glen R. Thomas; Kim Pizzingrilli; Wendell F. Holland
Insurance Coverage Requirements for Motor Carriers;
Doc. No. M-00041816Order By the Commission:
In 1995, we issued a declaratory order delineating various insurance requirements mandated by our regulations. Petition of Thomas Redfield, Doc. No. P-00950951 (Order entered October 4, 1995). Specifically, we determined that when a claimant is involved in an accident with a motor carrier, the motor carrier's insurance coverage is available to the claimant, even if the particular carrier vehicle involved in the accident was not listed on the insurance policy. We based our decision mandating coverage on the requirements of State law and our regulations,1 as well as the Certificate of Insurance2 filed with the Commission by the motor carrier's insurer (the Form E certificate), along with the endorsement3 to the motor carrier's insurance policy referenced in Form E. That certification and endorsement to the insurance policy, coupled with the statutory and regulatory provisions governing insurance requirements for motor carriers, led us to conclude that coverage was available to claimants, regardless of whether the particular carrier vehicle was listed on the insurance policy.
Notwithstanding our Redfield order, we are aware that an insurer providing coverage to motor carriers may be denying coverage based on the unlisted vehicle theory previously rejected in Redfield. In addition, we are also aware that an insurer may be denying coverage based on a similar unlisted driver theory. Apparently, this insurer is relying on recent case law, Lebanon Coach Co. v. Carolina Casualty Insurance Co., 675 A. 2d 279 (Pa. Super., 1996), to support a result contrary to our decision in Redfield.
Given our paramount concern that insurance coverage is available to individuals involved in accidents with motor carriers, as required by State law and Commission regulations, we will take this opportunity to readdress the Redfield issue. We find that this matter may merit issuance of a declaratory order in light of the significant public protection issues involved and the apparent uncertainty that exists. 66 Pa.C.S. § 331(f). Specifically, we will address the issue of claims being denied based on exclusionary language, such as vehicle and driver lists, allegedly found in insurance policies issued to motor carriers. Notwithstanding our prior decision in Redfield, we will invite comment from the insurance industry, the motor carrier industry, the public and any other interested party to address alleged uncertainties and legal controversies; Therefore,
It Is Ordered That:
1. A declaratory order proceeding is hereby initiated to address the effect of exclusionary clauses possibly found in insurance policies issued to motor carriers, and the effect of those clauses on coverage mandated by statute and regulation.
2. This order shall be served on all motor carrier insurers actively providing coverage in this Commonwealth.
3. This order shall be published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
4. Comments are to be filed within 20 days of the date of publication. An original and nine copies of comments must be filed with the Secretary, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission, P. O. Box 3265, Harrisburg, PA, 17105-3265.
JAMES J. MCNULTY,
Secretary[Pa.B. Doc. No. 04-1576. Filed for public inspection August 20, 2004, 9:00 a.m.] _______
1 66 Pa.C.S. § 512 (pertaining to power of Commission to require insurance) and 52 Pa. Code §§ 32.2 and 32.11 (pertaining to motor carrier insurance requirements).
2 Uniform Motor Carrier Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability Certificate of Insurance, Form E.
3 Uniform Motor Carrier Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability Insurance Endorsement, Form F.
