Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Damage Claims topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Committee advances amendment and hears testimony on bill to codify property-damage claims and subrogation rules
Summary
Senate Bill 131 received a second-hearing package of testimony and the committee adopted Amendment 399. Witnesses described the bill as codifying property-damage claims (diminution in value and loss-of-use), improving transparency in subrogation and intercompany recovery, and clarifying where diminution claims are recognized.
The Senate Judiciary Committee considered Senate Bill 131 at its second hearing, adopted a technical amendment and heard proponent testimony from an attorney and a crash survivor who urged clearer rules for property-damage claims and insurer subrogation.
Motion and amendment: Senator Catrona moved to adopt Amendment 399 to Senate Bill 131, describing it as a minor technical change to align the bill with common law and to clear up discrepancies in the salvage-value provision. The chair asked for objections; none were heard and the amendment was adopted.
Witness testimony: Jake Bossier, a Columbus-based personal-injury attorney and member of the Ohio Association for Justice, told the committee that the bill would create a user-friendly statutory guide to property-damage claims — including diminution in value and loss-of-use — that are currently governed by case law and can vary by appellate district. "This legislation is important because most people who are affected after a car crash need to handle their property damage claims immediately," Bossier said, describing how many claimants handle such claims without counsel and may be unaware of diminution-of-value rights.
Bossier urged codification to reduce geographic inconsistency: he said the 10th District has recognized diminution-of-value claims while other districts have been less consistent, creating unequal outcomes depending on where a crash occurs.
Sharon Montgomery, who identified herself as a survivor of a fatal crash, provided proponent and interested-party testimony about practical consequences of current practices and the need for fair subrogation rules. She described being left with insufficient replacement value when an insurer relied on blue-book (fair-market) valuation for an older but safety-appropriate vehicle and argued insurers should negotiate replacement value when necessary and pursue reimbursement from the at-fault party rather than leaving the policyholder uncompensated.
Montgomery also described broader concerns that some collision victims receive limited remedies if prosecutors decline criminal charges; she said that civil remedies should be accessible and that insurance and subrogation rules should not leave injured parties uncompensated.
Procedural notes and written testimony: Committee members recorded Sharon Montgomery’s testimony and the adoption of Amendment 399. The committee listed written opponent testimony for an unrelated bill later in the meeting but took no final vote on SB 131 itself at this hearing.
