New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s push to lower car insurance rates is facing fierce opposition from the state’s trial lawyers, who argue the plan prioritizes insurance industry profits over the rights of crash victims. The escalating dispute centers on proposed changes to how individuals injured in car accidents are compensated, a move critics claim could significantly limit legal recourse and unfairly benefit insurers.
Governor Hochul’s office, on , released a video defending the proposal, which aims to reduce premiums by altering the compensation process for injury claims. However, attorneys representing crash victims swiftly condemned the video as “propaganda,” accusing the governor of acting as a “shill” for the insurance industry. Lawyer Peter Beadle tweeted that the governor’s proposals extend beyond what was presented in the video and would negatively impact fair compensation for those injured in accidents.
The core of the disagreement lies in the threshold for assigning fault in car crashes. Currently, New York law allows victims to sue at-fault drivers, with juries determining the percentage of responsibility each party bears. Under the existing system, a victim can receive compensation even if partially at fault, with the payout reduced proportionally to their share of the blame. Governor Hochul’s proposal, however, would significantly alter this dynamic.
Under the proposed changes, a crash victim could receive no compensation whatsoever if a jury determines they are 51 percent or more responsible for the accident. This represents a substantial shift from the current system, where even a small degree of fault on the part of the other driver would entitle the victim to some level of recovery. Critics argue this creates a scenario where negligent drivers and their insurance carriers could avoid financial responsibility, even when their actions contribute significantly to an injury.
“If you are in a crash and there is fault to be shared, currently the jury determines each party’s fault and your recovery is reduced by your part of the blame. That’s fair and ensures you still get some compensation for the other person’s fault,” explained lawyer Beadle. “The governor proposes to change our system so that if you are 51 percent at fault, the person who was 49 percent at some fault in causing your injuries, walks away and pays nothing. You suffered a debilitating injury caused substantially by the other person but now you get nothing. How is that fair?”
The New York State Trial Lawyers Association contends that the governor’s plan will not deliver meaningful relief to drivers and may disproportionately benefit insurance companies. The debate echoes ongoing tensions over affordability in the state’s auto insurance market. Andrew Finkelstein, president of the New York State Trial Lawyers Association, discussed the issue with Capitol Pressroom on , arguing that the governor’s approach is misguided.
Adding fuel to the fire, lawyers allege that the governor’s push is heavily influenced by lobbying efforts from technology and rideshare companies like Uber and Lyft. Daniel Flanzig, an attorney, suggested the proposal is a “ruse funded by Big Tech and Uber to protect their pockets,” pointing out that these companies stand to benefit from reduced liability costs. He questioned whether Uber and Lyft would guarantee fare reductions or if insurance companies would commit to rate decreases in writing, suggesting a lack of concrete benefits for consumers.
Flanzig further argued that the focus on alleged fraud within the insurance system is a distraction, noting that auto insurance fraud pales in comparison to fraud in sectors like Medicare and Medicaid. He also criticized the governor’s office for suggesting that trial lawyers are motivated by financial gain, emphasizing that their primary role is to advocate for injured clients.
The Center for Justice & Democracy, a unit at New York Law School, supports the trial lawyers’ claims, reporting that insurance company profits have “ballooned to unprecedented levels” due to investment income and price-gouging. According to S&P Market Intelligence, the U.S. Property/casualty insurance industry experienced its best quarter in at least a quarter-century in November 2025.
Governor Hochul’s office, through spokesman Sean Butler, dismissed the criticism, labeling opposing attorneys as “ambulance-chasing trial lawyers” seeking to maintain a system that rewards “dangerous driving and fraudulent claims.” Butler asserted that the governor’s proposal would reduce state drivers’ insurance rates by 8 percent, or $300 per year. However, this figure implies an average annual premium of $4,000, a claim that appears inconsistent with data from Bankrate.
Bankrate’s data indicates that the average cost of full coverage auto insurance in New York varies significantly by location, with few municipalities reporting premiums near $4,000 annually. For state minimum coverage, the average annual cost is approximately $1,776. Butler also cited a $400 rebate program in Michigan as a potential model, but this program was funded by a surplus in a state health care account, not directly from insurance reform.
The dispute highlights a fundamental conflict between the desire to lower insurance costs for New York drivers and the need to ensure fair compensation for those injured in car accidents. As the debate continues, the outcome will likely have significant implications for both the insurance industry and the legal rights of accident victims.
