🚀 go-pugleaf

I was in the Coast Guard in 1976 in New England. Massachusets had a No
Fault insurance law. It was written almost exactly like this one.
Here's how it worked and how this one probably will.

 If you didn't have insurance you didn't get registration. If you got
insurance, got your car registered, then cancelled your insurance, the
insurance companies would contact DMV and they would suspend your
registration. If stopped with suspended registration the police would
seize your vehicle. These provisions are written into the proposed
California law and police have already seized a few unregistered
vehicles as test cases. 

Here's the good part. No fault, was your fault. No matter what
happened, even if someone backed into your car in a parking lot,
You contacted your Insurance company who paid claims. If you filed a
claim in Massachusetts you could pretty well figure on your premiums
(already the highest in the nation at the time) tripling. If you filed
more than one claim in a three year period, you would be cancelled. If
you were cancelled by a company, no one else would write you a policy.
The Insurance industry could effectively suspend your right to drive,
even to and from work, if you filed claims against them. 

Conspiring to refuse insurance to people who filed claims had no
financial impact on the Insurance industry. With forced compliance,
they had many more clients than before. Consequently the people of
Massachusetts paid the highest insurance premiums in the nation, while
driving around with dents in their cars, afraid to file valid claims.
The insurance companies simply collected the highest rates and if
someone filed a claim, got their right to drive suspended. 

This is not fiction or hypothesis I was there and SAW it. Massachusetts
voters recalled the no fault initiative. Read Prop 200 it can easily
work this way here.