Don’t Tell Me I’d ‘Presumptively’ Be Fine: A Single Father’s Warning on Hochul’s Insurance Cuts

Gov. Hochul says her auto insurance proposals wouldn’t have shut me out of court. I was able to bring my case because of New York’s serious injury standard, specifically the 90/180 worker protection, which her proposals would eliminate. My attorney met that standard, and the court allowed my case to proceed, despite the defense’s efforts to delay and deny my claim.

Before 2021, I was a teacher who spent long days on my feet, guiding students, encouraging them and trying to give them the stability every child deserves. Teaching was how I supported my daughter as a single father. It was how I kept our home steady. It was how I showed her that service and hard work matter.

Then a crash changed everything.

I was left with chronic pain and nerve issues that made even simple tasks difficult. I tried to keep teaching. I tried to shift online. I tried to push through the pain because parents do not get to quit, and single parents, least of all. But I could not return to the teacher I once was. My daughter watched me struggle to sit, to stand, to sleep, to work. She watched her father fight through pain just to get through a normal day.

That is what a serious injury looks like for real people.

New York law has always recognized that reality. One of the nine standards that defines a “serious injury,” known as the 90/180 rule, is what allowed my case to move forward. It protects people who cannot perform most of their daily activities for at least 90 of the first 180 days after a crash.  That is not a small inconvenience. That is for people who are knocked down for months and whose families feel the impact every single day.

People like me. Families like mine.

According to analyses of the executive budget, the governor’s proposal would eliminate the 90/180 category entirely. This would remove a long‑standing pathway for people whose injuries take time to fully reveal themselves, including concussions, traumatic brain injuries and soft‑tissue injuries that worsen over weeks or months.

The governor says her plan will deliver “affordability.” New Yorkers deserve to ask who that affordability is for. They also deserve to know why sweeping changes to long‑standing legal protections are being pushed through the budget process instead of being fully debated as standalone legislation.

A recent analysis by Weiss Ratings found that New York auto insurers already deny almost half of liability claims. Consumer advocates have pointed to that finding as evidence that insurers already hold significant power in the claims process. The governor’s proposals would make it even harder for injured New Yorkers to hold insurers accountable.

My own experience shows why these protections matter. My injuries were treated conservatively at first.  It took time for the full damage to become clear. The law understood that. Because of the 90/180 rule, my case was allowed to proceed.

The governor’s press team told The New York Post that her proposals would not harm my case, saying I would “presumably” qualify under other categories. I would invite the governor to spend one day in my body or one night trying to sleep through nerve pain before deciding what injured New Yorkers “presumably” qualify for.

It is no surprise that insurers and business groups have publicly supported the reforms. Patient advocates, trial lawyers and crash victims have strongly opposed them.

New Yorkers deserve policies that recognize the realities of recovery. The governor should stop dismissing the lived experiences of crash victims and start listening to the people whose lives will be shaped by these decisions.