1997-F2
View/download document
Cite as N.Y. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 1997-F2
GENERAL BUSINESS LAW 3966-z; INSURANCE LAW § 3440; VEHICLE AND
TRAFFIC LAW §§ 131, 137-a; L 1988 CH 784.
The Insurance Department has construed correctly the
relevant provisions of law, consistent with principles of
statutory construction, to achieve the legislative intent
underlying Chapter 784 of the Laws of 1988. The primary
legislative purposes are to provide insurance policyholders who
rent vehicles with insurance coverage for damage to their rental
vehicles and to prohibit rental vehicle companies from holding
renters liable, beyond $100, for damage to rental vehicles.
January 22, 1997
Hon. Edward J. Muhl
Formal Opinion
Superintendent of Insurance
No. 97-F2
Insurance Department
160 West Broadway
New York, NY 10013
Dear Superintendent Muhl:
Your counsel has requested our opinion as to whether the
Insurance Department has construed correctly the terms "private
passenger motor vehicle" and "rental vehicle" as used in the
State's collision damage waiver (CDW) statute (L 1988 Ch 784).
Some background and the definition of several terms are necessary
prior to specifying the issues presented.
The statute's legislative history indicates clearly that the
CDW statute was designed to curb abuses by certain rental vehicle
companies. Bill Jacket, L 1988 Ch 784, December 29, 1988
Governor's Memorandum of Approval and December 20, 1988 Attorney
General Memorandum in Support. The statute mandates that
automobile insurance policies issued on vehicles registered in
New York State provide separate rental vehicle coverage. Id. It
also prohibits rental vehicle companies from (1) holding
authorized drivers liable for damage to a rental vehicle, subject
to certain exceptions and a deductible; (2) charging their
customers more than the actual cost of repairs to a damaged
rental vehicle; (3) imposing mandatory charges beyond the rental
price quoted and charging any optional fees unless such fees are
disclosed in writing; and (4) charging for a collision damage
waiver and engaging in numerous other unfair trade practices.
Id.
2
1For example, some companies stated that CDW coverage was
mandatory when it was not. Some of those companies overcharged
consumers who declined CDW coverage beyond the actual cost of
repairs to a damaged rental vehicle. Id.
2Compounding this situation is the fact that the purchase of
a CDW was often unnecessary, since many consumers were already
covered through their own personal automobile insurance policies
or through the use of major credit cards. Id.
As noted in the Bill Jacket, collision damage waivers were
conceived as a means to relieve renters from liability for damage
to their rental cars. In exchange for a payment by the renter,
the company agreed to hold the renter harmless for damage to the
vehicle. Id. In the 1980s, certain rental vehicle companies
began to misrepresent the nature of CDW coverage, and some began
to charge unconscionable rates for CDW coverage.1 These
companies would advertise deceptively low daily or weekly rates
for their passenger rental vehicles. Once the consumer arrived
at the airport rental counter or other location to consummate the
rental agreement, however, he or she was subjected to high-
pressure sales tactics designed to extract unexpected and often
unnecessary CDW charges.2 Although consumers assumed that the
purchase of a CDW would afford complete financial protection from
liability in the event of damage to a rental vehicle, they often
discovered numerous fine print loopholes that made CDW coverage
worthless. Id.
To redress these practices, Chapter 784 added several
provisions to the Insurance Law and the General Business Law.
The Insurance Law was amended to include the following
definitional provisions:
For the purposes of this section, a "private
passenger motor vehicle" is a motor vehicle:
(1) of the private passenger or station wagon
type that is owned or hired by an individual
or by husband and wife under a long-term
contract and is neither used as a public or
livery conveyance for passengers nor rented
to others without a driver; or
(2) with a pick-up body, a delivery sedan,
panel truck or van, owned by an individual or
by husband and wife who are residents of the
same household or by a family farm
co-partnership or a family farm corporation,
3
and not customarily used in the occupation,
profession or business of the insured other
than farming or ranching, whether or not used
in the course of driving to or from work.
Insurance Law § 3440(a).
You have made two inquiries. The first concerns the
statutory obligation of insurers offering liability insurance to
provide rental vehicle coverage to their policyholders. Under
section 3440(b) of the Insurance Law, insurers offering liability
insurance policies for a "private passenger motor vehicle"
registered in this State must offer coverage for actual damage to
or loss of "rental vehicles" rented by an insured. That
provision identifies the types of insurance policies that must
include separate rental vehicle coverage.
[E]very motor vehicle liability insurance
policy which insures less than five private
passenger motor vehicles registered in this
state shall by endorsement, provide coverage
for the obligation of the insured for actual
damage to, or loss of, vehicles (including
loss of use) rented by an insured in the
United States, its territories or possessions
and Canada under a rental agreement with a
term of thirty continuous days or less,
regardless of where within those areas such
rental vehicle is registered, rented, or
operated, . . .. The term "rental vehicle"
shall be used as defined in section one
hundred thirty-seven-a of the vehicle and
traffic law, if a private passenger motor
vehicle and not used for the transportation
of persons or property for hire. Emphasis
added.
Section 137-a defines a "rental vehicle" as "[a] vehicle
owned by a person engaged in the business of renting or leasing
vehicles which is rented or leased without a driver to a person
other than the owner and is registered in the name of such
owner". Section 131 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law defines
"person" to include "[e]very natural person, firm, copartnership,
association, or corporation".
The underlined language of section 3440(b) (above) has
caused some insurance companies to question their responsibility
4
3Insurance companies are not required to provide rental
vehicle coverage as part of the insurance policy on a private
passenger vehicle or station wagon if it is used for public or
livery conveyance of passengers or rented to others without a
driver. Also, insurance companies need not provide this coverage
on a pickup truck, delivery sedan, panel truck or van if the
vehicle is used customarily in the occupation, profession or
business of the insured, other than farming or ranching.
to provide rental vehicle coverage for policyholders. Your
counsel has explained the problem as follows:
because of the § 3440(a) definition of
`private passenger automobile' relating to
the nature of ownership and use of the
vehicle, such a definition would seem to
eliminate coverage for any vehicle rented
from a rental vehicle company such as Hertz,
Avis, National, etc., the very kinds of
rentals the legislation was obviously
designed to cover.
Counsel is referring to the fact that the definition of "private
passenger motor vehicle" in section 3440(a) not only covers
certain types of vehicles but also includes an ownership
component.
In our view, the ownership component of this term defines
the insurance policyholders, subject to specific exceptions on
use of the covered vehicles, who have the statutory right to
receive from their insurance companies rental vehicle coverage.
The types of vehicles included in the definition of "private
passenger motor vehicle" are the vehicles of these insurance
policyholders. If such a vehicle is registered in New York, and
is not used for purposes specified in the statutory exceptions,3
the Insurance Law requires that the liability insurance policy on
that vehicle must include separate coverage of a rental vehicle
rented by the policyholder. The vehicles listed in the
definition of "private passenger motor vehicle" also identify the
types of rental vehicles which must be covered by the
policyholder's insurance coverage. In other words, these vehicle
types define the policyholder's car and a car he or she may rent.
The ownership component of the term "private passenger motor
vehicle", however, does not apply to the rental vehicle. If this
component did apply to the rental vehicle, it would defeat a
primary purpose of the CDW statute as indicated by the
5
legislative history and would bring about an absurd result. Such
a construction of the statute would prevent the realization of
the clear legislative intent to provide individuals and others
with insurance coverage on vehicles they rent from persons and
companies in the business of providing rental vehicles. It also
is contrary to well-accepted principles of statutory
construction. A statute is to be construed as a whole and all
parts of an act are to be read and construed together to
determine the legislative intent. People v Mobil Oil Corp., 48
NY2d 192, 199 (1979). It is appropriate to consider the mischief
sought to be remedied by the legislation, and to construe the
statute in a manner that suppresses the evil and advances the
remedy. Matter of New York Life Insurance Co. v State Tax
Commission, 80 AD2d 675, 677 (3d Dept), affd, 55 NY2d 758 (1981).
If possible, all parts of an enactment should be harmonized with
each other as well as with the general intent of the whole
enactment, and meaning and effect should be given to all
provisions of the statute. Sanders v Winship, 57 NY2d 391, 396
(1982); Honeoye School Dist. v Berle, 72 AD2d 25, 35 (4th Dept
1979).
Applying these principles, liability insurance coverage
which insures less than five "private passenger motor vehicles"
registered in New York must provide coverage for obligations of
the insured for actual damages to private passenger vehicles,
station wagons, vans, pick-ups, delivery sedans and panel trucks
which are rented by the insured from entities in the business of
renting vehicles as defined by sections 137-a and 131 of the
Vehicle and Traffic Law. This interpretation gives meaning and
effect to all provisions, harmonizes the various provisions and
achieves the legislative intent.
Your second inquiry relates to the obligation of rental
vehicle companies to hold renters harmless for damage to or loss
of the rental vehicle. Chapter 784 amended General Business Law
§ 396-z(2) as follows:
No rental vehicle company renting private
passenger motor vehicles shall, in rental
agreements of not exceeding thirty continuous
days, hold an authorized driver liable for
actual damage to, or loss of, such rental
vehicle (including loss of use) [subject to
certain exceptions and a deductible].
Emphasis added.
Chapter 784 added both the protections for renters in
section 396-z(2), and the definition of "private passenger motor
6
vehicle" in section 3440(a) of the Insurance Law. The General
Business Law has no separate definition of that term.
Apparently, the use in the General Business Law of the term, as
defined in section 3440(a) of the Insurance Law, has caused some
rental companies to question their obligations to limit the
liability of renters.
We conclude that the Legislature clearly intended that the
protection for renters apply to vehicles offered for rental by
any person or organization in the business of renting out
vehicles to the public. We believe that the reference to
"private passenger motor vehicles" in section 396-z(2) was only
intended to define the types of rental vehicles that are covered.
The plain language of section 396-z(2), stating that "[n]o rental
vehicle `company' . . . shall . . .", clearly indicates an intent
to cover companies renting out vehicles. The term "rental
vehicle company" is defined as "any person or organization . . .
in the business of providing rental vehicles to the public from
locations in this state". General Business Law § 396-z(1)(d).
Emphasis added. See also, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 137-a
(defining rental vehicle). Meaning and effect can only be given
to all parts of this provision and they can be harmonized by
construing "private passenger motor vehicle" as a reference to
types of vehicles and "rental vehicle company" as the definition
of entities that must provide protection to renters. See,
Sanders v Winship, supra, 57 NY2d at 396; Honeoye School Dist. v
Berle, supra, 72 AD2d at 35. This interpretation achieves the
clear statutory intent to protect renters against being held
liable by companies for damages to rental vehicles (subject to a
deductible and certain exceptions). See, Matter of New York Life
Insurance Co. v State Tax Commission, supra, 80 AD2d at 677.
We agree, therefore, with the Insurance Department's
interpretation of section 3440 of the Insurance Law and
section 396-z(2) of the General Business Law. The term "private
passenger motor vehicles", used in section 396-z(2) and in the
description of rental vehicles in section 3440(b) of the
Insurance Law, refers to the types of vehicles listed in section
3440(a) of the Insurance Law. The ownership component of the
term "private passenger motor vehicle" defines the beneficiaries
of the obligation of insurance companies under Insurance Law
§ 3440(b) to provide coverage of rental vehicles.
We conclude that the Insurance Department has construed
correctly the relevant provisions of law, consistent with
established principles of statutory construction, to achieve the
clear legislative intent underlying Chapter 784 of the Laws of
1988. The primary legislative purposes are to provide insurance
7
policyholders who rent vehicles with insurance coverage for
damage to their rental vehicles and to prohibit rental vehicle
companies from holding renters liable, beyond $100, for damage to
rental vehicles.
Very truly yours,
DENNIS C. VACCO
ATTORNEY GENERAL