Insurance Information | All About Insurance Online

An extensive directory of insurance information resources.


HIGHTSTOWN —– One week after the Borough Council approved a revised taxi ordinance without lowering the insurance requirements, Mayor Bob Patten has invited the president of a taxi insurance company to speak to the governing body about it, according to the borough clerk.

And that move is strongly opposed by at least one member of council who said the entire idea is “improper.”

Another, who is open to hearing the presentation, called the entire taxi situation a “mess.”

Meanwhile, all seven companies that applied for licenses to operate cabs in the borough for 2009 and 2010 had their applications sent back to them Wednesday because none of them had insurance that meets the local $100,000 coverage requirement, $65,000 higher than the state regulation, said Deputy Clerk Leona Baylor.

According to Borough Clerk Debra Sopronyi, the mayor invited Frank Morelli, president and chief executive officer of Wall-based Taxisure Exchange, to come before the council during its next meeting Dec. 7.

The reason, she said, is for the mayor to “educate the council” about what exactly are the insurance options cab companies have.

Councilwoman Isabel McGinty questioned Tuesday whether a presentation by Mr. Morelli would be appropriate, especially since any suggestions the CEO might make could be construed as simply aiding his business.

”Surely this isn’t going to happen,” Ms. McGinty said. “To have a representative from a particular business come before us to make pitches that are geared toward their individual business, how is this an appropriate presentation?”

The councilwoman said she had a hard time believing such a presentation would even make it onto the meeting agenda.

”Anyone with common sense would see why this can’t happen. I would encourage others to consider the precedent that might be set,” Ms. McGinty said.

The issue stems from questions over whether the insurance requirements spelled out in the borough’s taxi ordinance could ever be met because taxi insurance policies are written differently than consumer policies, Ms. Sopronyi said.

The borough’s ordinance requires a minimum of $50,000 coverage for property damage and $100,000 coverage for personal injury, similar to how coverage is expressed in consumer pollicies.

Taxi insurance, however, is normally written with one general limit that covers both property damage and personal injury, according to Skip Soberg, vice president and senior underwriter for Taxisure Exchange.

He confirmed Tuesday that Mr. Morelli was invited and does plan to speak to the council.

But he said the difference in how a policy is written shouldn’t cause a problem for local cab companies as long as the total coverage in the taxi policy matches what is required by the borough.

So why does the mayor want the presentation?

No one is apparently sure, and Mayor Patten did not return calls seeking comment.

Councilman Mike Theokas said he’s willing to hear what Mr. Morelli has to say, but questioned why it would be necessary since the council already had decided the issue.

”I don’t have a problem with it. I’m always willing to get more information. I don’t know where it’s going, though,” he said. “Council was pretty adamant in its position when the ordinance was adopted.”

The council approved a revised taxi ordinance at its Nov. 16 meeting by a 5-1 vote and chose not to lower the $100,000 minimum personal injury insurance requirement. That was despite four taxi companies saying the increased premiums would force them out of town.
























   HIGHTSTOWN —The Borough Council did not budge this week on lowering the $100,000 taxi insurance requirement it had not been enforcing for nearly five years.

   That’s despite four cab companies claiming the regulation, higher than the $35,000 state minimum, would force them out of town.

   Manuel Mendita, of East Windsor-based Super Taxi, told the council Monday that getting the additional coverage would nearly double his annual premium from $4,500 to $8,000.

   ”The way the economy is, the cab companies don’t have that amount of money,” Mr. Mendita said.

   But his comments were met with little sympathy from council as it approved the latest revisions to its taxi ordinance by a 4-1 vote.





   The updated ordinance puts the borough zoning officer in the taxi license application process with him also ensuring the business is located in allowed areas.

   The lone dissenting voice was Councilman Mike Theokas, who said he voted against it because it did not include restrictions on the number of cabs that can operate on borough streets, something he has been supporting for nearly a year.

   During the discussion, Mr. Theokas was the only council member who entertained the idea of lowering the insurance requirement, saying the higher costs “tie businesses’ hands.”

   When the question came up of what to do about companies that apply with the lower coverage, councilmen Jeff Bond — who has advocated for even higher insurance requirements — and Larry Quattrone said they should be rejected.

   ”You reject them, and then you highlight why they failed and ask them to get more insurance. It’s as simple as that,” Mr. Quattrone said.

   Three other cab companies — borough-based Mega Taxi and United Taxi and East Windsor-based TeleTaxi — all told the Herald last week that they’ve been operating for years with the state minimum and can’t afford to raise it.

   And each of those companies have had their licenses renewed each year since 2005 when the Borough Council approved its taxi ordinance containing the higher requirement.

   Those applications were processed by the borough’s deputy clerk, Leona Baylor, who recently acknowledged and took the blame for the oversight.

   Taxi applications going forward will be held to the requirement and rejected if they do not have it, Ms. Baylor said.

   She added this week that it is still too early to tell how many of the seven applications meet borough standards.

   The taxi insurance regulations for surrounding East Windsor, where each of the cab companies mentioned also operate, mirror the state requirements, according to Mayor Janice Mironov.

mchiappardi

@centraljersey.com













<!–
[adsys_ad::story_middle_003]

–>









Get latest Local Central Jersey News from CentralJersey.com

Comments are limited to 200 words or less.

Add your own comments:


Please note by clicking on “Post Comment” you acknowledge that you have read the
Terms of Service
and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms.
Although we do not have any obligation to monitor these
comments, we reserve the right at all times to check the
comments and to remove any information that is unlawful,
threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene,
vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise
objectionable to us at our sole discretion, and to disclose
any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation,
or government request. We also reserve the right to
limit future participation by any user who violates these terms.
All threats to systems or site infrastructure shall be
assumed genuine in nature and will be reported to the
appropriate law enforcement authorities
























   HIGHTSTOWN —The Borough Council did not budge this week on lowering the $100,000 taxi insurance requirement it had not been enforcing for nearly five years.

   That’s despite four cab companies claiming the regulation, higher than the $35,000 state minimum, would force them out of town.

   Manuel Mendita, of East Windsor-based Super Taxi, told the council Monday that getting the additional coverage would nearly double his annual premium from $4,500 to $8,000.

   ”The way the economy is, the cab companies don’t have that amount of money,” Mr. Mendita said.

   But his comments were met with little sympathy from council as it approved the latest revisions to its taxi ordinance by a 4-1 vote.





   The updated ordinance puts the borough zoning officer in the taxi license application process with him also ensuring the business is located in allowed areas.

   The lone dissenting voice was Councilman Mike Theokas, who said he voted against it because it did not include restrictions on the number of cabs that can operate on borough streets, something he has been supporting for nearly a year.

   During the discussion, Mr. Theokas was the only council member who entertained the idea of lowering the insurance requirement, saying the higher costs “tie businesses’ hands.”

   When the question came up of what to do about companies that apply with the lower coverage, councilmen Jeff Bond — who has advocated for even higher insurance requirements — and Larry Quattrone said they should be rejected.

   ”You reject them, and then you highlight why they failed and ask them to get more insurance. It’s as simple as that,” Mr. Quattrone said.

   Three other cab companies — borough-based Mega Taxi and United Taxi and East Windsor-based TeleTaxi — all told the Herald last week that they’ve been operating for years with the state minimum and can’t afford to raise it.

   And each of those companies have had their licenses renewed each year since 2005 when the Borough Council approved its taxi ordinance containing the higher requirement.

   Those applications were processed by the borough’s deputy clerk, Leona Baylor, who recently acknowledged and took the blame for the oversight.

   Taxi applications going forward will be held to the requirement and rejected if they do not have it, Ms. Baylor said.

   She added this week that it is still too early to tell how many of the seven applications meet borough standards.

   The taxi insurance regulations for surrounding East Windsor, where each of the cab companies mentioned also operate, mirror the state requirements, according to Mayor Janice Mironov.

mchiappardi

@centraljersey.com













<!–
[adsys_ad::story_middle_003]

–>









Get latest Local Central Jersey News from CentralJersey.com

Comments are limited to 200 words or less.

Add your own comments:


Please note by clicking on “Post Comment” you acknowledge that you have read the
Terms of Service
and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms.
Although we do not have any obligation to monitor these
comments, we reserve the right at all times to check the
comments and to remove any information that is unlawful,
threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene,
vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise
objectionable to us at our sole discretion, and to disclose
any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation,
or government request. We also reserve the right to
limit future participation by any user who violates these terms.
All threats to systems or site infrastructure shall be
assumed genuine in nature and will be reported to the
appropriate law enforcement authorities



Health Care | Insurance