Committee debates House Bill 57 and related bills over who must insure peer-to-peer rentals and delivery drivers

Rep. Jeff Coleman and other sponsors told the House Committee on Insurance that House Bill 57 updates Missouri law to treat peer-to-peer car sharing and delivery network services the same way the state treats ride-share platforms, so commercial liability coverage will apply when a vehicle is used to provide those services.

Coleman said the bill would extend statutory protections created in 2016 for transportation network companies to newer business models: peer-to-peer car sharing (owners making their vehicles available to renters through a platform) and delivery network companies (platforms that coordinate deliveries of goods). "Our statutes require an update so that the very same liability protections that apply to our ride [share] programs also apply to leasing their personal vehicles or delivering goods," Coleman told the committee.

Stakeholders split along familiar industry lines over two central issues: (1) whether the delivery-network coverage period should begin when a driver opens an app to solicit work (the so-called "delivery-available" period), and (2) whether the peer-to-peer definition needs a scope clause that confines the new statutory definitions strictly to insurance law and prevents platforms from using the new language to avoid other legal obligations.

Delivery-platform witnesses such as Clark Karriker of DoorDash said the companies already provide up to $1,000,000 in contingent automobile liability coverage and support clear standards, but they object to a provision that would require platforms to maintain insurance while a driver is merely online with no commitment to accept work. "Drivers can go online and receive offers, but they have the ability to reject every single offer," Karriker told the committee, adding that platforms and sponsors could agree on compromise language. DoorDash proposed limiting online coverage to drivers who had completed a delivery within the prior 24 hours as a possible middle ground.

Rental and car-rental-industry witnesses pushed the opposite point on scope. Gordon Reel of Enterprise Mobility and other representatives said they back House Bill 57 because it tracks the National Conference of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL) model and includes scope language that ensures peer-to-peer companies cannot selectively claim or evade non-insurance rules such as airport regulations, taxes or other laws. Reel warned platforms sometimes "pick and choose what laws apply to them," and he said scope language prevents a platform that markets itself as peer-to-peer from later claiming the protections of a car-rental company when convenient.

Turo's representative, Sean Vink, told the committee that most states that adopted the NCOIL model omitted scope language; he urged negotiation but said the scope clause was not strictly necessary. Several insurers and trade groups — including the Missouri Insurance Coalition, American Property Casualty Insurance Association, National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies and Shelter Insurance — said they support insurance clarity and the delivery-network provisions, but they differ on whether the scope language should remain.

Public witnesses raised two additional concerns. Walmart told the committee it opposes the delivery-network portion of HB 57 as written because platforms could create coverage where drivers are logged on but not actually performing commercial activity. Lawyer Randy Alberhasky urged higher minimum liability insurance levels for peer-to-peer rentals than Missouri’s current statutory minimums, calling $25,000 limits (in place for decades) inadequate for serious injuries and noting peer-to-peer usage and theft risks in some jurisdictions.

Committee members did not take a final vote. The hearing paused for the committee to reconcile language differences among four related bills (HB 57, HB 974/HB 9704, HB 10302 and HB 11401 as presented) and adjourned after parties said they would continue negotiations on scope and the delivery-available definition.