Harsh Times in Oregon

Oregon, and especially Portland, are known for being weird. But they're not known for being harsh.

I think both of those impressions are generally accurate.

But there’s an exception. And that exception is just how punitive the legislature is to uninsured drivers who get hurt as a result of someone else’s negligence.

Liability insurance is required for motorcycles in both Oregon and Washington. That hasn't always been the case. But it's true now.

Even though insurance is required in Washington, it has no impact on the type of damages that an injured person can seek in Washington. Whether or not they have liability insurance is irrelevant.

That’s consistent with common sense: If someone gets rear-ended by another driver going 100 miles per hour, it shouldn't matter whether the driver who's been rear-ended has liability insurance. They are not at fault for the collision.

But that's not the case in Oregon. In Oregon, an injured person may not seek non-economic damages if they didn't have their own liability insurance.

Here’s the text from the Oregon statute (ORS 31.715):

Using that same example, if gets rear-ended in Portland and doesn't have liability insurance, they can't seek their non-economic damages.

(Non-economic damages include things like pain, suffering, and loss of quality of life. They're usually the biggest part of any claim.)

I understand Oregon's interest in motivating people to carry liability insurance. But I question whether anyone is going to make a decision about insurance coverage based on a statute that discusses what seems like a remote possibility and uses terms they probably don’t understand.