Colorado House advances bill to bar insurers from criminal restitution except when direct victims

House members approved House Bill 10-17 as amended, a measure that would generally bar insurance companies from receiving criminal restitution unless the insurer was a direct victim of the offense.

The bill’s sponsors said the statutory change is meant to prioritize human victims over corporate insurers in the criminal-restitution process. Representative Zocai, a bill sponsor, described the measure as designed “to provide victim prioritization in the criminal restitution process” and said a four-page ‘‘strike-below’’ amendment (L005) was filed to clarify legislative intent after recent Court of Appeals guidance.

Co-sponsor Representative Espinosa argued the policy limits the compounding financial burden on people convicted of crimes and prevents insurance companies from collecting “a third bite of the apple.” She said the change would preserve avenues for insurers that are direct victims to seek restitution and would address worker-compensation circumstances where a company might be affected.

Opponents raised fiscal and policy concerns. Representative De Graaf said removing insurers from restitution could shift costs to taxpayers or civil courts and argued the change may simply move the expense onto premiums or court time. The sponsor replied that the amendment would reduce judicial administrative work and return more restitution directly to harmed individuals.

Amendment L005, the strike-below clarifying the bill’s application, passed on a voice vote; subsequently the chamber approved HB 10-17 as amended by voice vote.

What’s next: The Committee of the Whole reported HB 10-17 as amended for second reading and placed it on the calendar for third-reading final passage.

Votes and action: According to the transcript, amendment L005 passed by voice vote and the chamber passed HB 10-17 as amended (voice votes recorded).