"assurances that the drivers of these services have commercial insurance."
I'm not sure about the situation in California but I looked into how taxis were insured in Maryland and it turns out they basically don't have insurance. They are only required to have a certain amount of cash in an account that acts like insurance if something happens. I believe the amount was around $30,000 which is very very little if something legitimately serious were to happen. Which is why I find it funny when people think taxis are some how better insured than ride share services.
What? They must have insurance, and the state minimum is $30,000 per person.
> The Maryland General Assembly approved the increase in April, slightly upping legal minimum insurance coverage to at least $30,000 per person and $60,000 per crash.
Yeah, but they have a special program for Taxi's that allow what they call "self-insurance" where the taxi is insured by a bond or letter of credit with the MVA.
Yup, the difference between a taxi and an individual though is the taxi company will create an individual llc for each taxi so if a given taxi is in a bad accident they will just bankrupt that llc and try to skip out on paying anything.
When there is an accident, injured parties go after rich people, like the expression "deep pockets", and juries aren't sympathetic to them. Rich people are advised to get (and can afford) insurance more than middle class people.
I believe bonds in lieu of insurance are commonly allowed across the US, though maybe not for taxis?
As the fleet size increases, the amount of the bond goes up as well -- essentially giving companies the choice of self insuring. I'd be surprised if many independent operators were self-bonded.
And of course, it's not like the minimum insurance requirements are great across the board either.
> And of course, it's not like the minimum insurance requirements are great across the board either.
The alternative is something like Toronto where personal car insurance costs upwards of $300 a month for a 23 year old male with no tickets or accidents because the minimum coverage is so extensive.
I'm not sure about the situation in California but I looked into how taxis were insured in Maryland and it turns out they basically don't have insurance. They are only required to have a certain amount of cash in an account that acts like insurance if something happens. I believe the amount was around $30,000 which is very very little if something legitimately serious were to happen. Which is why I find it funny when people think taxis are some how better insured than ride share services.