Skip to main content

Dui restitution

Pittsburgh, PA |

Is restitution always ordered in dui cases? If someone's insurance pays what is the need for restitution, this is why we pay insurance premiums I thought. Or is it only necessary if someone was under/uninsured?

+ Read More

Attorney answers 5

Posted

If the victim is covered by insurance, the defendant would still be obligated to pay the deductible and could be obligated to reimburse the insurance company what they paid out. Speak with your attorney who will be able to provide specific details.

Posted

Restitution is usually for the victim's out of picket expenses. You need to contact your insurance

Posted

Mr. Keller is correct. The court will order restitution for the out-of-pocket costs incurred by the victim, which is usually limited to their deductible if they have insurance. The insurance company has a civil claim.
I recommend that you speak to your attorney about the matter so that he or she can advise you if there are any unique circumstances in your case.

Posted

I respond separately here to attempt to avoid some potential confusion on the issue of restitution in criminal cases. Section 1106 of the Crimes Code, 18 Pa.C.S.A. §1106, governs restitution in criminal cases. Insurance companies are defined as encompassed by the term "victim" §1106 (h), and subsection (c) states specifically under the subheading "Mandatory restitution", "The court shall not reduce a restitution award by any amount that the victim has received from an insurance company but shall order the defendant to pay any restitution ordered for loss previously compensated by an insurance company to the insurance company." The statute is clear, but I will concede that my experience has shown that the plain language of the statute is commonly ignored by the judge when imposing orders of restitution. Elsewhere in §1106, the statute makes clear that the "court shall order full restitution . . . [r]egardless of the current financial resources of the defendant."

Asker

Posted

So, you're essentially saying that the law provides one would have to reimburse their insurance company, but the judges don't often impose this sanction?

William A. Jones Jr.

William A. Jones Jr.

Posted

That has been my experience. The statute's language is mandatory in nature, meaning the court should have no discretion with respect to entering such an order. The explanation for it not being ordered in compliance with the statute's directive is a function of prosecutors who do not know the law and/or judges who are not sympathetic with the idea of order restitution for the benefit of insurance companies.

Posted

Yes, usually if insurance covered lets say, a fence that was wiped out by your car in a DUI event, you should only be responsible for "out of pocket" expenses of the victim, which means the deductible or any other item not covered by insurance.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.

Ask a Question

- or -

Search for lawyers by reviews and ratings.

Find a Lawyer