2007 House Bill 5453 (Allow seniors to waive no-fault MCCA coverage )

[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

Introduced by Rep. Joe Hune (R) on November 8, 2007, to allow a person age 65 or older who is on Medicare to waive the mandatory unlimited personal injury protection (PIP) auto insurance coverage provided by the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association and billed as MCCA assessments on auto insurance bills. A person who waives the coverage would only be charged 20 percent of the MCCA assessment. Also, to increase the maximum PIP work loss benefit from $1,000 for a 30 day period to $4,400.
- Referred to the House Insurance Committee on November 8, 2007.
  - Reported in the House on February 14, 2008, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
- Referred to the House Oversight And Investigations Committee on February 26, 2008.

Most Recent Comments

1) Insurance Industries grab for more Profit [by wolf on February 4, 2008]
Anyone 65 and older who thinks this is a good deal should think again.
Right now the MCCA Has to take care of all your cost for life if need be due to a Motor vehicle accident. If you are a driver, passenger, pedestrian, or what ever.
If you think Medicare will or is going to do that, you are dead wrong. This is nothing more than the Insurance Industries and their Legislative lackeys grab for more profit and less cost. Any Representative or Senator voting for this is not looking out for your best interest.
Reply

Line

2) me [by Anonymous Citizen on November 13, 2007]
Why would we be forced to pay 20 per cent, and why would you have to wait until age 65. There are many people who have lost their jobs due to injurys on the job, and who are on medicare and medicade at this time because of the on the job injury. I for one could use a brake on my insurance now not 5 years from now. Why is that all decreases in costs happen a few years down the road, not right away when the bill is passed?
Reply

Line

3) I noticed that [by Anonymous Citizen on November 13, 2007]
the bill also makes maximum loss of wages benefit payable from %1000 per month to $4400 per month RETROACTIVE TO 2005! Why has it become necessary to make it retroactive? How much will this cost?
Where is this money going to come from? How many recipients are there presently recieving benefits for loss of wages and how often is their medical status reviewed and by who?
Reply

Line

View Full Conversation