2017 ORS 806.050¹
Falsification of financial responsibility
  • penalty

(1) A person commits the offense of falsification of financial responsibility if the person does any of the following:

(a) Forges or, without authority, signs any evidence of proof of compliance with financial responsibility requirements.

(b) Files or offers for filing any evidence of proof of compliance with financial responsibility requirements knowing or having reason to believe that the proof is forged or signed without authority.

(c) Knowingly certifies falsely to the existence of motor vehicle liability insurance meeting the requirements under ORS 806.080 (Insurance) or some other means of satisfying the financial responsibility requirements or making a financial responsibility filing.

(2) A denial of coverage, signed by an officer or agent of an insurer, returned to the Department of Transportation after inquiry from the department as to the accuracy of a certification of the existence of liability insurance under ORS 806.150 (Department verification program) or 811.725 (Driver failure to report accident to Department of Transportation) is prima facie evidence of false certification.

(3) Any person convicted of knowingly certifying falsely to the existence of motor vehicle liability insurance or to the existence of some other means of satisfying the financial responsibility requirements shall be imprisoned for no less than three consecutive days. In no case shall the execution of the punishment imposed by this section be suspended by the court, nor shall any person subject to such punishment be sentenced to probation by the court.

(4) A person who is convicted for violation of this section is subject to ORS 806.230 (Failure of previous violator to file) if the person does not make future responsibility filings as required by that section.

(5) The offense described in this section, falsification of financial responsibility, is a Class B misdemeanor except that violation of subsection (1)(c) of this section is a Class A misdemeanor. [1983 c.338 §841; 1985 c.16 §425; 1985 c.393 §62; 1993 c.14 §27]

Chapter 806

Notes of Decisions

Under Former Similar Statutes (Ors Chapter 486)

When a driver is involved in an accident that otherwise brings him within the purview of this chapter, he must thereafter file proof of future responsibility regardless of whether or not there is a reasonable possibility he was in any de­gree at fault in the accident. Boykin v. Ott, 10 Or App 210, 498 P2d 815 (1972), Sup Ct review denied, app. dis., 411 US 912, 36 L Ed 2d 304, 93 S Ct 1554

This chapter was not unconstitu­tional as denying due process or equal protec­tion of the laws under the U.S. Constitu­tion. Boykin v. Ott, 10 Or App 210, 498 P2d 815 (1972), Sup Ct review denied, app. dis., 411 US 912, 36 L Ed 2d 304, 93 S Ct 1554

This act does not require coverage for inten­tionally inflicted injuries or damages. Snyder v. Nelson/Leatherby Ins., 278 Or 409, 564 P2d 681 (1977)

Inten­tional inflic­tion of injury or damage occurs where injury or damage sustained was intended result of ac­tion. Snyder v. Nelson/Leatherby Ins., 278 Or 409, 564 P2d 681 (1977)

Motor vehicle liability policy issued pursuant to Financial Responsibility Law must provide coverage for liability arising from physical injuries to relatives of insured who reside in insured’s household. Dowdy v. Allstate Ins. Co., 68 Or App 709, 685 P2d 444 (1984), Sup Ct review denied

In General

Financial responsibility laws generally are to ensure that drivers can respond in damages for liability and especially to ensure that motor vehicle accident victims are compensated for injuries. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Jones, 306 Or 415, 759 P2d 271 (1988)

Car insurance policy violated Financial Responsibility Law where it excluded liability coverage for permissive user’s injury of insured while driving insured’s car. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co. v. Jones, 306 Or 415, 759 P2d 271 (1988)

Automobile insurance policy must cover not only named insured but also must provide coverage for all per­sons who operate insured vehicle with con­sent of insured. Viking Ins. Co. v. Petersen, 308 Or 616, 784 P2d 437 (1989)

Where Financial Responsibility Law requires motor vehicle insurance policies to insure against all liability arising out of motor vehicle “ownership, opera­tion, use or maintenance,” insurer’s named driver policy which insurer sold to insured in connec­tion with insured’s vehicle must be construed as providing coverage by law and insurer is responsible for insured’s de­fense. Viking Ins. Co. v. Perotti, 308 Or 623, 784 P2d 1081 (1989)

Family exclusion pro­vi­sion of policy is ineffective only as to statutorily re­quired min­i­mum amounts; insurer may limit addi­tional coverage by any exclusion not otherwise prohibited by law. Collins v. Farmers Ins. Co., 312 Or 337, 822 P2d 1146 (1991); Farmers Insurance Co. v. Mowry, 350 Or 686, 261 P3d 1 (2011)

Atty. Gen. Opinions

Under Former Similar Statutes (Ors Chapter 486)

Financial responsibility certifica­tion date and necessary in­for­ma­­tion, (1978) Vol 38, p 1876

Law Review Cita­tions

Under Former Similar Statutes (Ors Chapter 486)

8 WLJ 77-84 (1972); 12 WLJ 406-412 (1976)

1 Legislative Counsel Committee, CHAPTER 806—Financial Responsibility Law, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ors806.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
2 Legislative Counsel Committee, Annotations to the Oregon Revised Stat­utes, Cumulative Supplement - 2017, Chapter 806, https://­www.­oregonlegislature.­gov/­bills_laws/­ors/­ano806.­html (2017) (last ac­cessed Mar. 30, 2018).
 
3 OregonLaws.org assembles these lists by analyzing references between Sections. Each listed item refers back to the current Section in its own text. The result reveals relationships in the code that may not have otherwise been apparent.