People who claim government employees negligently damaged their vehicles while on the job would automatically be awarded up to $6,000 in damages "if such payments are not made within 30 days," should a bill approved in committee Wednesday become law unamended.
Senators suggested the language making payment automatic might be clarified later in the process however.
The bill, sponsored by Sen. Shawn-Michael Malone and others, seeks to create an expedited process for the government to settle claims for vehicle damage and increase the maximum amount the government can offer in settlement from $3,000 to $6,000. Malone, Senate President Ronald Russell and others said the bill was a response to increasing reports of accidents involving government vehicles and complaints the settlement process often takes a long time. The bill itself asserts "settlement of these claims takes at least a year or more," creating hardship for those whose vehicles were damaged.
Several senators gave anecdotal accounts of deserving individuals who were awaiting settlements. Sen. Nereida "Nellie" Rivera-O’Reilly told of a woman, a diabetic, double amputee dialysis patient who fell on the floor when a VITRAN public bus “hit a crater in the road” and spent five months in the hospital, but was still awaiting some settlement with the government. Sen. Louis Hill told of a person injured during a gunfight between police and criminals, possibly from glass shattered by a police gunshot, who had never received any cash compensation from the V.I. Government.
Although not vehicle damage as envisioned in the bill, these sorts of cases highlighted the general problem of long delays in government settlements, they said.
The V.I. Department of Justice opposes the bill, Chief Deputy Attorney General Wayne Anderson testified, saying it is unnecessary and "will only expose the government to greater financial liability at a time when the government can least afford it."
Anderson said claims are actually paid efficiently, with most processed in less than six months, and could be reduced to an average of 90 days under the current system.
But Anderson said Justice’s biggest concerns with the bill were that its language appeared to assume all claims are legitimate, did not give enough time to investigate claims and appeared to require the government to automatically pay all claims that are filed properly.
"(W)e do see fraudulent claims," Anderson said. "We must have sufficient time to properly investigate all claims. Remember if we have a limited staff of investigators we will not be able to immediately complete the investigation of each claim."
Under the current system, those who do not wish to settle still have the option of filing a tort claim in court, Anderson said.
Malone said he stood by the aims and broad principles of the bill, arguing there was a need to create a structural incentive for Justice to speed up its process, but agreed the bill needed some amendment.
"The passage where someone submits a claim and if they do not get processed they automatically get paid, I agree that needs to be clarified," Malone said.
Voting to sent the bill out of committee to the Rules and Judiciary Committee with a favorable recommendation were: O’Reilly, Russell, Sens. Alvin Williams, Carlton "Ital" Dowe, Sammuel Sanes and Celestino White. Sen. Usie Richards was absent.
The committee also approved a bill changing obsolete language in the law referring to the role of the police commissioner in driver licensing and vehicle registration. The sections of code predate the separation of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles into an independent agency. The bill would also change obsolete references to insurance "stickers," replacing them with language referring to "insurance cards."
Voting yea were: O’Reilly, Russell, Williams, Sanes and White. Dowe and Richards were absent.
A bill to create new penalties and felony status for gang crimes was held in committee for amendment after several senators expressed concern over a few of its provisions. Williams said he was concerned the bill allowed for no minimum sentence and heavy fines, leaving open the possibility that poor people caught up in some trouble would go to jail because they could not pay heavy fines, while well-healed drug dealers might be able to pay and walk. O’Reilly said she wanted to see a corresponding effort to help young people stay out of trouble before supporting more and more severe penalties.
