A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 7 of Chapter 6 of Title 18.2 a section numbered 18.2-213.3, relating to fraudulent insurance acts; civil penalty.
HB1335 would add a new section to Virginia’s criminal code defining several acts as “fraudulent insurance acts” and imposing a civil penalty of $1,000 per violation. The bill covers knowingly making false or misleading statements in support of an insurance claim, submitting false information in an insurance application, and concealing material facts in an application. It also reaches conduct tied to insurance-related solicitation and staged or fabricated motor vehicle accidents, as well as certain deductible-reimbursement arrangements in weather-related home repair or remodeling claims.
The measure is aimed at insurance fraud prevention across multiple settings, including auto, property/casualty, and application fraud. It would also prohibit lawyers and health care providers from directly or indirectly paying people to solicit clients for them, and it specifically bars personal-gain solicitation of injured motorists to retain counsel or seek medical care. The bill includes a savings clause stating that it does not restrict public communications or conduct protected by professional rules or state or federal law.
If enacted, HB1335 would create a new civil enforcement tool in Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia for fraudulent insurance-related conduct. It would expand the state’s ability to penalize false claims activity, staged accidents, misleading insurance applications, improper client solicitation tied to injury claims, and deductible-buydown practices in weather-related property repairs. The bill would affect insurers, insureds, claimants, attorneys, health care providers, contractors, and any person involved in organizing or facilitating the prohibited conduct.
The available record shows no committee debate or recorded votes, so there is no documented public sentiment from hearings or floor action. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears to be framed as an anti-fraud and consumer-protection measure, but the absence of discussion means support or opposition cannot be measured from the provided materials. Its referral and subsequent being left in committee suggest it did not advance, but the reason is not stated.
The most likely points of contention are the bill’s restrictions on solicitation by lawyers and health care providers, which could raise concerns about professional speech, referral practices, and access to counsel or medical treatment for injured motorists. Another potential issue is the deductible-payment prohibition for contractors, which may be viewed as limiting common insurance-claim settlement practices in weather-damage repairs. The staged-accident and false-claim provisions are less controversial in principle, but the breadth of the definitions and the $1,000-per-act civil penalty could still draw scrutiny from insurers, consumer advocates, and regulated professions.