Opinion
No. 2371 C.D. 2011
07-19-2012
Guang Yu Liu v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles, Appellant
BEFORE: HONORABLE DAN PELLEGRINI, President Judge HONORABLE P. KEVIN BROBSON, Judge HONORABLE JAMES GARDNER COLINS, Senior Judge
OPINION NOT REPORTED
MEMORANDUM OPINION BY PRESIDENT JUDGE PELLEGRINI
The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles (Department) appeals from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County (trial court) sustaining the statutory appeal of Guang Yu Liu (Liu) from a three-month suspension of her vehicle registration for failure to maintain the required financial responsibility.
The facts of this case are not in dispute. Liu is the registered owner of a 2003 Lexus sedan which was insured by GEICO General Insurance Company (GEICO). By letter dated June 1, 2011, the Department informed Liu that it had received information from GEICO that the insurance policy covering her vehicle was terminated on May 28, 2011. The letter requested that Liu provide verification of insurance coverage on the 2003 Lexus or her vehicle registration would be suspended for three months. Having received no response from Liu, the Department sent her an official notice dated July 18, 2011, informing her that the registration for the vehicle would be suspended for three months effective August 22, 2011, as required by Section 1786(d) of the Motor Vehicle Financial Responsibility Law (MVFRL). Liu appealed to the trial court.
75 Pa. C.S. §1786(d). Section 1786(a) of the MVFRL requires that "[e]very motor vehicle of the type required to be registered under this title which is operated or currently registered shall be covered by financial responsibility." 75 Pa. C.S. §1786(a). Section 1786(d)(1) provides for the suspension of registration and operating privilege for failure to maintain the required financial responsibility:
The Department of Transportation shall suspend the registration of a vehicle for a period of three months if it determines the required financial responsibility was not secured as required by this chapter and shall suspend the operating privilege of the owner or registrant for a period of three months if the department determines that the owner or registrant has operated or permitted the operation of the vehicle without the required financial responsibility. The operating privilege shall not be restored until the restoration fee for operating privilege provided by section 1960 (relating to reinstatement of operating privilege or vehicle registration) is paid.75 Pa. C.S. §1786(d)(1).
Before the trial court, the Department offered the following documents into evidence:: (1) the official notice of suspension of registration dated July 18, 2011; (2) the Department's computer printout of the vehicle's details; (3) the Department's initial letter to Liu dated June 1, 2011; (4) an electronic transmission from GEICO regarding the termination of insurance; and (5) the certification of Anita M. Wasko, director of the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, certifying that all of the Department's submitted documents were true and correct.
In response, Liu testified that she was "getting married in China during that period of time," (Reproduced Record [R.R.] at 17a.), and did not receive the Department's notification until she returned home on July 6, 2011, at which time she purchased insurance from 21st Century Auto Insurance Company (21st Century). She offered her Passport as evidence that she returned to the United States on July 6, 2011. Liu further testified that the vehicle was not driven while she was in China. The Department admitted that Liu obtained insurance through 21st Century effective July 6, 2011, but that was nine days after the 31 day lapse permitted by Section 1786(d)(2)(i) of the MVFRL.
The record indicates that Liu's return to the United States was delayed due to issues with obtaining her visa.
The trial court sustained Liu's appeal and rescinded the Department's registration suspension because she was in China getting married when her insurance lapsed, and she presented evidence that she immediately paid to have her insurance reinstated when she returned to the United States. This appeal followed.
Our review of a trial court's order sustaining an appeal from a registration suspension is limited to determining whether the trial court committed a reversible error or abused its discretion, and whether the necessary findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence. Deklinski v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles, 938 A.2d 1191 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007). --------
On appeal, the Department argues that the trial court erred in sustaining Liu's statutory appeal because the Department satisfied its prima facie burden and because Liu failed to present any evidence that would satisfy one of the three statutory exceptions. We agree.
In registration suspension cases arising under Section 1786 of the MVFRL, the Department bears the initial burden of proving that a lapse in the required financial responsibility has occurred. "The [D]epartment's certification of its receipt of documents or electronic transmission from an insurance company informing the [D]epartment that the person's coverage has lapsed, been canceled or terminated" constitutes prima facie proof of the lapse in financial responsibility coverage." Deklinski, 938 A.2d at 1194 (quoting 75 Pa. C.S. §1377(b)(2)). The burden then shifts to Liu to rebut the presumption by clear and convincing evidence that insurance was continuously maintained on her vehicle or, alternatively, that she fits within one of the three exceptions set forth in Section 1786(d)(2)(i)-(iii). Deklinski, 938 A.2d at 1194. Those exceptions are, in pertinent part:
(i) The owner or registrant proves to the satisfaction of the [D]epartment that the lapse in financial responsibility coverage was for a period of less than 31 days and that the owner or registrant did not operate or permit the operation of the vehicle during the period of lapse in financial responsibility.
(ii) The owner or registrant is a member of the armed services of the United States, the owner or registrant has previously had the financial responsibility required by this chapter, financial responsibility had lapsed while the owner or registrant was on temporary, emergency duty
and the vehicle was not operated during the period of lapse in financial responsibility ...75 Pa. C.S. §1786(d)(2)(i)-(iii).
(iii) The insurance coverage has terminated or financial responsibility has lapsed simultaneously with or subsequent to expiration of a seasonal registration, as provided in section 1307(a.1) (relating to period of registration).
Because there is no allegation that Liu is a member of the United States armed services or that she maintained only a seasonal registration, the only pertinent exception is (d)(2)(i). However, an owner of a vehicle does not fall within this exception if the lapse in financial responsibility coverage lasts longer than 31 days. See Banks v. Department of Transportation, 856 A.2d 294 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004). That is so even if the vehicle was not driven during the time the vehicle was uninsured. Jones v. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Motor Vehicles, 723 A.2d 1090 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1999). The lapse in this case was for 39 days, and the MVFRL explicitly provides for a suspension of motor vehicle registration if the lapse is more than 31 days. Accordingly, the Department properly suspended Liu's vehicle registration for 90 days. The order of the trial court is reversed.
/s/_________
DAN PELLEGRINI, President Judge ORDER
AND NOW, this 19th day of July, 2012, the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Northampton County dated November 22, 2011, is hereby reversed, and the three-month suspension of Guang Yu Liu's vehicle registration is hereby reinstated.
/s/_________
DAN PELLEGRINI, President Judge