The language of car insurance can be pretty dry. So can the language of the courts. A judge in Pennsylvania has managed to spice up both.

Bard of the Bench: Pennsylvania Supreme Court Justice J. Michael Eakin.

In what you might call a case of poetic justice, Justice J. Michael Eakin of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court authored an opinion about a car insurance fraud conviction entirely in rhyming fashion.

In a six-page ruling issued Dec. 21, Eakin overturned the fraud conviction of Daniel Goodson III, but not without a heavy dose of literary flair. Eakin is known for waxing poetic in court opinions — something that has drawn criticism from other judges.

The court ruled 4-2 in Goodson’s favor. By the way, the dissenting opinion didn’t rhyme.

The How Appealing blog first alerted the world to Eakin’s latest poetic performance. WSJ.com’s Law Blog and the ABA Journal’s Law News Now blog also have chimed in, along with The TortsProf Blog and The Associated Press.

Eakin’s car insurance fraud opinion reads as if it came right out of a British Literature 101 course. Here’s an example:

In January, 2001, appellant’s car was in a collision.
His insurer totaled the aging New Yorker, then made a just division
of the value of the insurance claim, sending $6,289 to the lender;
the balance of $135, to appellant they made tender.
And thus the matter terminated, or so one might have thought,
but that was not to be, when Goodson’s later schemes were caught.

Dissatisfied with his monetary settlement from the crash, Goodson forged a $6,289 check that was made to look like it was from State Farm.

Eakin picks up the story from there:

Of course the crime soon came to light, as agents of State Farm
refused to pay the check he’d forged, which forestalled further harm:
“It’s not from us, there is no claim, the check we cannot honor!”
And appellant’s scheme was thus undone — he knew he was a goner.
When braced, he paid the money back, a mitigating solution,
but despite this act, the Commonwealth commenced its prosecution.

Convicted of the forgery, insurance fraud, and theft,
he admits the first and last, but denies the charge that’s left.
He claims the sentence for insurance fraud is most certainly amiss —
he says “I may be guilty, but I’m just not guilty of this.
My sentence is inappropriate — undo the wrongful conviction.”
And in the end, seeks this relief from our appellate jurisdiction.

Here, Eakin explains why the court threw out the insurance fraud conviction:

Because he made no insurance claim, nor a proffer to an insurer,
he didn’t commit insurance fraud, and neither judge nor juror
can to the contrary rightly find, even if they’d like to.
Two crimes are strikes, but not the third — the count is but strike two,
and while those strikes are such that he’s not going to walk,
on this last pitch we have no choice but to call a figurative balk.
Sentenced on the other crimes, he surely won’t go free,
but we find he can’t be guilty of this final felony.

You’ve got wonder whether Goodson, the man who appealed the fraud conviction, appreciates the language of the Bard of the Bench. Perhaps Goodson simply wanted a ruling in plain English (or, in the case of the courts, plain legalese). But in the end, the man got what he sought and maybe learned a literary lesson in the process.

Here’s Eakin’s final word(s) on the Goodson case:

Convictions for the forgery and theft are approbated —
the sentence for insurance fraud, however, is vacated.
The case must be remanded for resentencing, we find,
so the trial judge may impose the result he originally had in mind.
What Goodson did is serious, but doesn’t comprise this crime —
there’s simply no rhyme nor reason for it, for these reasons (and in rhyme).

A new coalition of consumer, business and law enforcement groups is taking on car insurance fraud in Florida.

Among the 12 groups that compose Gear Up Florida are the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, Florida Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, Florida Police Chiefs Association and Florida Sheriffs Association. The coalition wants Florida lawmakers to pass legislation that would crack down on car accident fraud.

Critics say loopholes in Florida’s no-fault car insurance law allows criminals to take advantage of a system designed to provide medical care to drivers and passengers who are legitimately injured in car accidents, regardless of who’s at fault. Florida leads the nation in staged car accidents and questionable car insurance claims.

No-fault coverage also is known as personal injury protection (PIP). Florida law requires that a driver carry at least $10,000 in PIP coverage.

Primarily because of PIP fraud, officials say, Floridians pay 56 percent more than motorists in other states for car insurance – an average of $736 in Florida compared with $471 nationwide.

“Undercover investigations have revealed that many participants in staged accidents were part of a larger group and that the staged crash was just the first step in the overall scheme,” Steve Casey, executive director of the Florida Sheriffs Association, says in a news release. “PIP fraud used to be more of an individual crime and now has become an organized crime.”

The coalition recommends Florida lawmakers look at:

• Allowing more time (30 to 60 days) for investigation of suspicious insurance claims.

• Limiting attorneys’ fees to reduce the incentive for unnecessary or drawn-out litigation.

• Placing more scrutiny on medical clinics that treat people who have filed PIP claims.

• Establishing guidelines to prevent excessive, unnecessary medical treatment for PIP patients.

Florida’s 2012 legislative session starts Jan. 10.

Paying for an insurance policy is difficult to justify when you are having problems paying your mortgage or putting food on the table. Most states now have systems in place that automatically cancel your tag if your car insurance policy lapses. If your tag is canceled, you cannot legally drive that vehicle on any state until you acquire car insurance. In some states, being behind the wheel of a car with a revoked tag results in an automatic jail sentence with fines as high as $2500. Additionally, driving without auto insurance can result in your license being suspended for a timeframe ranging from three months to three years in many states. If drivers continue to drive without insurance, they may face going to jail for an extended period or the confiscation of their vehicle.

Every state in the union is passing legislation permitting harsher penalties for uninsured drivers. The majority of these laws are sponsored and funded by the insurance industry. Reports are currently showing that uninsured drivers are causing problems in all states and communities ranging from higher insurance premiums for people who do carry car insurance to increased federal payments at emergency medical outlets who never are reimbursed for services rendered. Uninsured motorist coverage has alleviated some of these issues but those costs are passed on to drivers who do carry auto insurance. Many states are also hiring more traffic officers to help lower the rates of uninsured drivers on their roads, but the resources required to completely eliminate uninsured drivers is unsustainable by any state considering the depth of the economic crisis the entire country is in.

Purchasing a car insurance policy is not only a legal requirement, but is a moral obligation for everyone behind the wheel. We as citizens of this country enjoy the rights and privileges of our great nation and we should not shirk the responsibilities and duties that come with them. You are doing the ethically correct thing by purchasing auto insurance.

As we examine consumer behavior toward laws regarding a state-mandated car insurance policy, we can learn some time-tested truths. “Not everyone complies,” said Scott Harrington, health care and risk management professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “The auto insurance mandate is almost everywhere. But it’s not rigorously enforceable.” If this is indeed true, it begs the question, if the individual states can’t enforce driver insurance laws on a smaller scale, how does Congress propose to enforce the massive health insurance mandate being considered at the Federal level? Will people respond to the new laws?

Within the debate on mandated insurance another interesting factor surfaces. Based on insurance industry data, the same number of uninsured motorists almost exactly coincides (within one percentage point) with the number of people without any health care insurance now. David Sampson, CEO and president of the Property and Casualty Insurers Association of America, tells us that a driver’s personal financial status — not the laws of their state — indicate whether or not drivers will buy car insurance. Though mandated by law, do we suppose this pattern of behavior will change somehow when it comes to health care?

The states’ car insurance mandates have fines and penalties attached to them for non-compliance. But the fact of the matter is, it appears people will do what they can afford and what they, on their own day-to-day list of survival of priorities, deem necessary. Not everyone has adequate guaranteed income and an elite health care program. The result is that people don’t comply with the “laws” regarding car insurance.

With history as our backdrop, we must ask ourselves the inevitable and honest question — will a government-mandated health care law enforced at the Federal level even work, or is it a grand, expensive illusion fated for the scrap heap of history? What we know works over time in all markets and throughout the history of the world is open competition between providers of any good or service.

Based on our knowledge of the effectiveness of government-mandated car insurance, many people doubt that any form of government-mandated health insurance will provide a solution for the number of people without health insurance. If the reform passes, only time will tell.

In addition to the global financial situation, other factors have also contributed to the recent rise in car insurance premiums. Despite high gas prices, there are more vehicles on the road than ever before. More people are driving and insurance companies have to meet consumer coverage demands. From offering free online quotes to promises on lowering interest and premium rates, many insurance companies are trying to counter the increases with premium services.

Another factor is the increase of fraud and personal injury claims. With the employment market as uncertain as ever, several people have tried to make ends meet by faking injuries in auto-related incidents. As sad as this is, the number of motorists claiming whiplash and other injuries has tripled since the late ’90s. This has not only led to a car insurance premium increase, but also a rise in costs to cover uninsured motorists involved in accidents.

The legal fees associated with these incidents are also another factor. Due to an overwhelming volume of fraud related cases, car insurance companies have had no choice but to increase premiums. This coincides with the demand for legal teams to sort through documentation, organize material, and work with car insurance companies to hopefully reach a favorable settlement for all parties involved. This takes a considerable amount of time, and therefore, the fees assessed have risen dramatically.

A huge reason for the recent increase is providing coverage for new drivers. This is generally applied to teenagers, who present a higher risk than seasoned or older drivers. In the majority of the country, driving is a necessity and no longer a luxury. The U.S. is becoming more of a mobile society; therefore, insurance companies want to cover as many motorists as possible within a safe and efficient policy. A new driver will be charged a higher premium due to being more of a liability than a veteran motorist. This, coupled with the many reasons for the increase, has doubled and even tripled the premiums for our newest motorists across the U.S.

The accused are Amjad Javaid, 53; his wife Zarina Javaid, 43; their son, Fahad Javaid, 24; and their son’s wife, Fatima Javaid, 23. The alleged theft took place on October 3, 2006, when the Javaids filed a claim with their insurance company (Hartford) for the theft of a 2003 Range Rover. Later the same day, police found the SUV in San Jose. It had been set on fire and was in unsalvageable condition.

According to a statement by Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner, all four have been charged with conspiracy, presenting a false oral or written statement to the insurance company, and knowingly presenting a false claim to the insurance company. All except for Zarina Javaid are also being charged with arson.

The false oral statement charge stems from statements that the Javaids made to Hartford the year of the alleged theft. They reported that the vehicle had been stolen from in front of their house in Elk Grove on October 2. They claimed that no one was home at the time and that the theft was discovered upon returning.

Investigators, however, learned that the Javaids had lied about where they were on the day of the alleged theft; investigators also learned that the Javaids had likely been suffering financial difficulties at the time, which suggested a motive for insurance fraud. Hartford Insurance Company denied the Javaids’ claim, which would have required a $50,000 payment to the family.

The sentence for car insurance fraud, if the Javaids are convicted, would be up to five years in prison for each family member, and/or a $10,000 fine for each convicted individual.

Cars being lit on fire to justify car insurance claims have become more common in the past several years as the economy has declined. James Quiggle, a representative of The Coalition Against Insurance Fraud, says that the recession has been a serious factor: “A growing number of stressed-out consumers around the U.S. are ditching unwanted vehicles to try and stop them from falling off a financial cliff in the recession.”

Police in the Las Vegas area alone found more than 70 burned-out cars in 2008 in spite of the increase in availability of cheap car insurance. The U.S. Fire Administration has released 2007 statistics indicating that 20,500 cars were set on fire in that year alone.

Lt. Robert Duvall of the LVPD Auto Theft Unit urges people not to try to commit car insurance fraud by destroying their vehicles: “Take the hit on your credit or whatever, don’t commit this crime. What you’re risking in injury far outweighs anything you’ll gain financially.”

Given the current economic conditions, paying lower car insurance premiums can help residents of Georgia keep a little extra money in their pockets for other expenses. Keeping these rates low is something that drivers will need to work hard to do. Keeping accidents and claims to a minimum allow car insurance companies to offer lower Georgia car insurance rates to their existing and new customers. Once the car insurance companies start paying out claims for accidents and loss, rates will start to go back up.

If you are a driver in Georgia, and are not affected by the lower car insurance rates offered by these companies, there may be options available to you with your current carrier. Some car insurance companies offer discounts and incentives to their customers, and knowing what to look for can help you save money on your car insurance premiums.

Safe Driver Discount
If you are a safe driver, inquire about getting a safe driver discount. Companies like Allstate offer this discount to their customers.

Student Discounts
Students and recent graduates may qualify for a discount on their car insurance premiums.

Multiple Car Discount
Do you have more than one car? Try and get both cars on the same policy. Most insurance companies will offer lower rates to customers who have more than one car on a policy.

Defensive Driver Discount
Ask you insurance agent if your car insurance company offers a defensive driver discount. Companies like State Farm Insurance offer a discount for taking an approved defensive drivers course.

Bundling Your Insurance Policies
If you own a home and have homeowners insurance, ask your agent if the company offers car insurance and if you can get a discount by bundling it with your homeowners insurance. This will not only be convenient, but it can possibly save you money on both policies.

These are just a few of the many discounts that are offered by insurance companies, and they may help you get a lower car insurance rate.

There are also many other factors that car insurance companies use when determining your car insurance rates. Things like credit, driving history, age and gender, where you live, and even what kind of car you drive can determine your rate, and possibly get you some discounts.

In these tough economic times, it is very strange that the taxpayers would be forced to pay for something like car insurance, which is what makes this situation in Bucks County so ironic. It is also important to remember that Bucks County already has some extremely cheap car insurance, so it is not as if these government workers could not afford the car insurance rates on their own. The taxpayers of Bucks County should be outraged by this because their tax money could be going toward more useful social programs in the area.

Recently, Bucks County has also been victim of a scam where a licensed car insurance dealer was advertising his services in New York. This is because the average cost of insurance in New York is about $3,000 more per year than it is in Bucks County. These New Yorkers were traveling to Bucks County to get their insurance and then getting cheap car insurance. However, if these people were ever in an accident, it would affect the insurance rates in Bucks County rather than New York. Therefore, this scam could lead to higher rates on car insurance in Bucks County which, in turn, would cost the taxpayers even more money in the future.

What this fraud shows is that government workers should feel lucky that they have some of the lowest car insurance rates in the country and should gladly pay for their own insurance. The $400 or so that these individuals are collecting every month could be used for other, more useful, things. People are being laid off in the county everyday and countless workers are being forced to pay for their own healthcare, but these private sector employees are being given free car insurance. While this incentive makes being a government worker a source of pride, it is a program that should be altered because it is not fair to the region’s taxpayers.

Opening in November, this new car rental center cost nearly $640 million, according to bizjournals.com. A quick five minute trip on an elevated train system will get passengers to and from the new car rental center. All car rental companies will be operated from the airport. This will cause less confusion to potential customers who are looking for car rentals as all car rental companies will be in one central place in the airport.

All residents near the airport as well as other people who travel to and from the airlines within it are being informed of the new car rental center. In a recent press conference, the General Manager of Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport, Ben DeCosta, stressed how convenient it will be when travelers know exactly where to go for their cars.

Ultimately, the new car rental center at the airport is part of an additional Capital Improvement Program within the airport. This program will add another $6 billion worth of changes and improvements to Hartsfield-Jackson in the years to come.

For those needing car rentals, this new car center will be convenient. When looking for car rentals, it’s important to consider car insurance as well. Car insurance premiums and car insurance rates are two important factors to consider and research prior to renting a car from any airport center. Often, many drivers do not realize that they are already covered when driving a rental car, so they do not have a need to purchase additional car rental insurance. Contact your auto insurance provider prior to approving your car rental reservation to confirm all of these details. Ultimately, it’s better to be safe than sorry, and if trouble arises, you do not want to be responsible for the costs incurred.

A car rental center can answer any additional questions regarding renting a car, coverage applied, and any additional taxes or fees added to the rate. A car rental center at an airport is just another added convenience provided to travelers by the world’s busiest airport.

Of the six most popular midsized sedans (the Honda Accord, Hyundai Sonata, Mazda 6, Nissan Maxima, Ford Fusion, and Chevrolet Malibu), none earned the top rating of “good” in extensive tests performed by the IIHS. “Consumers buy midsize cars for practical reasons,” said Joe Nolan, Senior Vice President of the IIHS. “There’s nothing practical about a $1,000-plus repair bill after a minor bump in commuter traffic.”

The Institute has developed a new rating protocol for bumpers, assisted by two rounds of tests. The protocol takes into consideration real-world damage patterns, average repair costs, and the frequency of insurance claims. Vehicles were tested for impact at 3 and 6 mph and then given a rating of good, acceptable, marginal, or poor based on what it would cost to repair the entire front bumper; the entire rear bumper; just the corner of the front; and just the corner of the rear.

The best-performing vehicle, the Mazda 6, averaged a repair cost of $871 and was given an “acceptable” rating. The only other current vehicles rated acceptable are the Ford Focus, Smart Fortwo, and Scion xB. “Although midsize car bumpers still allow way too much damage in minor impacts, it’s encouraging that some manufacturers are designing better ones,” says Nolan.

The worst performing vehicle, the Chevy Malibu, averaged a repair cost of $2,329. The Ford Fusion also received a “poor” rating, with an average repair cost of $2,207.

“Ford fit the Fusion’s front and rear with weaker bumper beams, and this had a big effect on the test performance,” said Nolan. The Malibu repair bill is high in part because the front grille actually protrudes past the center of the bumper; as a result, the grille and Chevy emblem are destroyed on impact. Those parts alone cost more than $600 to replace.

U.S. federal regulation of bumper strength is minimal. Canadian standards were higher until last year, which meant that automakers that sold the same vehicles in the U.S. and Canada had to manufacture the vehicles to Canadian standards, which required bumpers to prevent damage to headlights at impacts up to 5 mph. The new lowered standard is 2.5 mph for full front and rear bumpers and only 1.5 mph for all corners.

The amount of repair bills can dramatically affect a driver’s car insurance rate, making the issue of great interest to the IIHS, especially in an economic environment in which many drivers are foregoing car insurance because they can’t afford car insurance rates and are willing to risk having to pay repair bills themselves. It is estimated that if the current trend continues, 1 in 6 drivers will be uninsured by 2010.