« Back to BG&S in the News

Is The Additional Personal lnjury Protection Mandated By The New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission Available To An Injured Pedestrian?
By: Charles W. Benton, Esq.

All for-hire vehicles regu1ated by the New York Taxi & Limousine Commission must maintain Personal Injury Protection (PIP) coverage in an amount not less than $200,000.00 per person pursuant to 35 RCNY Section 6-11. This amount is in excess of the $50,000.00 amount required by New York State Insurance Regulations for mandatory PIP protection. New York State Insurance Regulations provide for an Additional PIP coverage above and beyond the $50,000.00 New York State minimum requirements (See 11 NYCRR 65.12 through 65.13). Endorsements and exclusions regarding Additional PIP coverage generally preclude an injured pedestrian from recovering under such coverage unless the pedestrian owns an insured vehicle or is a relative of a person who has purchased the Additional PIP protection.

Because the rules implementing the additionally mandated $200,000.00 per person PIP coverage applicable to for-hire vehicles regulated by the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission have been upheld (See United Car & Limousine Foundation Inc. v. New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission, 178 Misc.2d 734, 680 N.Y.S.2d 815 (Sup. Ct. New York County 1998), the question becomes whether the mandated $200,000.00 PIP protection for such vehicles acts as a superseding Additional PIP endorsement which overrides the general New York State Insurance Regulations regarding Additional PIP protection which are not normally applicable to pedestrians. The short answer is no.

Section 370 of the Vehicle & Traffic Law mandates minimum limits for public liability insurance carried by for-hire vehicles in New York State. However, it has been held that these minimum requirements may be raised by a municipality as a valid and constitutional exercise of power granted to the local government (See Foley v. McKnealley. 67 Misc.2d 889, 325 N.Y.S.2d 165 (Sup. Ct., Orange County 1971).

Section 1600 of the Vehicle & Traffic Law addresses the issue of whether a local authority can enact or enforce a local law, ordinance, rule or regulation which conflicts with a provision of the Vehicle & Traffic Law. The aforementioned Section 370 of the Vehicle & Traffic Law requires that businesses who carry passengers must maintain insurance in the form of an insurance policy approved by the Commissioner of Insurance for certain minimum amounts. Those minimum amounts are less than the amount mandated by the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission. Vehicle & Traffic Law Section 1600 sets up the criteria for determining whether a local rule or ordinance which undertakes to regulate in some respect the use of a motor vehicle deals with a subject on which the State Legislature has reserved to itself the sole right to regulate. The statute provides that in order for the ordinance to be valid it must not be in conflict with the Vehicle & Traffic Law provisions or, if it is in conflict, its enactment must have been expressly authorized by the terms of the Vehicle & Traffic Law itself. Therefore, if the Additional PIP coverage which was mandated by the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission were to be paid to injured pedestrians, such payment would conflict with New York State Insurance Regulations relating to who can benefit from Additional PIP coverage. Because of this conflict, such local law cannot be valid unless it was expressly authorized by the terms of the Vehicle & Traffic Law. In this case it is not. Thus, the right to enact legislation with regard to who can benefit from Additional PIP protection has, in effect, been pre-empted by the New York State Legislature and the applicable Vehicle & Traffic Law provisions.

Thus, a pedestrian who is struck by a for-hire vehicle that is licensed by the New York City Taxi & Limousine Commission cannot take advantage of the $200,000.00 Additional PIP coverage mandated by 35 RCNY Section 6-11. Since many of these accidents involve New York City pedestrians who do not own a car or who are not a relative of someone who has purchased Additional PIP protection, these accident victims will be limited in their recovery to the basic PIP coverage.

« Back to BG&S in the News