House Bill 53 amends North Carolina’s Safe Driver Incentive Plan to raise the property-damage dollar thresholds used to classify at-fault accidents as major, intermediate, or minor. Under the bill, a major accident would be one involving bodily injury or death, or property damage of $5,975 or more, up from $3,850. An intermediate accident would cover property damage over $3,570 but less than $5,975, and a minor accident would be one with $3,570 or less in property damage, up from the current $2,300 cutoff.
The bill also preserves the Bureau’s authority to assign points and surcharges for bodily injury accidents based on severity, while ensuring the most severe bodily injury category does not exceed the point value and surcharge for a major property-damage accident. The act would take effect October 1, 2025, and would apply only to accidents occurring on or after that date.
Impact
The bill would amend G.S. 58-36-75, which governs at-fault accidents and moving violations under North Carolina’s Safe Driver Incentive Plan, thereby changing how insurers and the state’s rating system classify accidents for surcharge purposes. By increasing the dollar thresholds, more accidents with moderate property damage would likely be treated as less severe than under current law, potentially affecting insurance premium surcharges, point assignments, and recoupment assessments for drivers. The change would apply prospectively to accidents on or after October 1, 2025.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was broadly supported in the House, passing second reading by a wide margin of 112 yeas to 1 nay. No committee transcripts are available, so there is no recorded debate to indicate organized opposition or detailed concerns. The vote pattern indicates general agreement with updating the accident thresholds, likely reflecting a view that the current dollar amounts are outdated.
Contention
The main policy issue is whether the Safe Driver Incentive Plan’s accident thresholds should be raised to reflect current repair and medical costs, which would reduce the number of accidents classified in the higher surcharge categories. Potential concerns could come from insurers or others worried that higher thresholds may lessen surcharge revenue or change risk-based pricing, while supporters would likely argue the existing thresholds are too low and no longer reflect modern vehicle repair costs. Because there were no committee transcripts, the specific arguments of supporters and opponents are not documented in the provided materials.