Pa. Cons. Stat. » 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. (VEHICLES) / Chapter 17
Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes

75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1781 (2026)

 Notice of sanction for not evidencing financial responsibility.

✓ current as of May 2026
Coverage note: this corpus holds the consolidated Pa.C.S. titles only. Unconsolidated P.S. statutes (UTPCPL 73 P.S. § 201-1, Liquor Code, wage payment laws) are not included; a miss here does not mean the statute does not exist. Check palegis.us.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section PA-LEGpalegis.us JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

 

 

SUBCHAPTER H

PROOF OF FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

 

Sec.

1781.  Notice of sanction for not evidencing financial responsibility.

1782.  Manner of providing proof of financial responsibility.

1783.  Proof of financial responsibility before restoring operating privilege or registration.

1784.  Proof of financial responsibility following violation.

1785.  Proof of financial responsibility following accident.

1786.  Required financial responsibility.

1786.1. Online verification of financial responsibility.

1787.  Self-insurance.

1788.  Neighborhood electric vehicles.

 

Cross References.  Subchapter H is referred to in sections 1377, 1550 of this title.

§ 1781.  Notice of sanction for not evidencing financial responsibility.

An applicant for registration of a vehicle shall acknowledge on a form developed by the Department of Transportation that the applicant knows he may lose his operating privilege or vehicle registrations if he fails to maintain financial responsibility on the currently registered vehicle for the period of registration.

(Feb. 7, 1990, P.L.11, No.6, eff. July 1, 1990)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 1988–2016 · leading case: Burstein v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins., 809 A.2d 204 (Pa. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Burstein v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins., 809 A.2d 204 (Pa. 2002). “See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a). Fundamental questions thus presented are: what precisely was the General Assembly’s conception of UM and UIM insurance when it first mandated such coverage; if it did not have a fixed understanding, to whom did it intend to delegate the determination of…”
Erie Ins. Exch. v. Lake, 671 A.2d 681 (Pa. 1996). · cites it 2× “A binder offers temporary protection for the insured pending the investigation of the risk by the insurance company until a formal policy of insurance is issued.”
Wolgemuth v. Harleysville Mut. Ins., 535 A.2d 1145 (Pa. 1988). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a), (c). The act defines the term “underinsured motor vehicle” as a “motor vehicle for which the limits of available liability insurance and self-insurance are insufficient to pay losses and damages.”
Heller v. Pennsylvania League of Cities & Municipalities, 32 A.3d 1213 (Pa. 2011). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a). 15 Penn PRIME argues, “In light of the express public policy allowing an insured not to provide UIM coverage, a provision for such coverage subject to an exception for employees who receive workers’ compensation comports with public policy.”
Burstein v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins., 742 A.2d 684 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1999). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a). 7 Appellees are precisely the type of individuals who underinsured motorist coverage was designed to protect— individuals injured by a tortfeasor with inadequate insurance coverage.”
Petty, T. v. Federated Mut. Ins., 152 A.3d 1020 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). “This waiver signed by MeQuillen contains a verbatim recitation of the language used in 75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(c). In reviewing the application of statutory requirements, “[cjourts [ ] must not interpret a statute in a manner that leads to an absurd result.”
Com., Dept. of Transp. v. Riley, 615 A.2d 905 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). “Furthermore, individuals registering their motor vehicles must sign a form which acknowledges that their registration may be suspended if they fail to maintain liability insurance on their vehicle during the period of registration.”
Com., Dept. of Transp. v. Slack, 623 A.2d 364 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1992). · cites it 2× “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781; see also Department of Transportation v.”
Commonwealth v. Thomas, 600 A.2d 237 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 1991). “…a form acknowledging his awareness of the penalty for failure to maintain financial responsibility on his vehicle. 75 Pa.C.S. § 1781.”
In re Wylie, 4 Pa. D. & C.4th 664 (1990). “In addition, 75 Pa.C.S. § 1781 requires all applicants for registration of a motor vehicle to sign a form acknowledging that the applicant is put on notice that failure to maintain financial responsibility may result in the loss of the motor vehicle registration.”
Walsh v. Royal Ins., 709 F. Supp. 553 (E.D. Pa. 1988). “Section 2000(a), which requires motor vehicle liability insurance to include uninsured motorist coverage, provides in part: No motor vehicle liability policy of insurance insuring against loss resulting from liability imposed by law for bodily injury or death suffered by any…”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1781(a) — 4 cases
Burstein v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins., 809 A.2d 204 (Pa. 2002). “See 75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a). Fundamental questions thus presented are: what precisely was the General Assembly’s conception of UM and UIM insurance when it first mandated such coverage; if it did not have a fixed understanding, to whom did it intend to delegate the determination of…”
Wolgemuth v. Harleysville Mut. Ins., 535 A.2d 1145 (Pa. 1988). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a), (c). The act defines the term “underinsured motor vehicle” as a “motor vehicle for which the limits of available liability insurance and self-insurance are insufficient to pay losses and damages.”
Heller v. Pennsylvania League of Cities & Municipalities, 32 A.3d 1213 (Pa. 2011). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a). 15 Penn PRIME argues, “In light of the express public policy allowing an insured not to provide UIM coverage, a provision for such coverage subject to an exception for employees who receive workers’ compensation comports with public policy.”
Burstein v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins., 742 A.2d 684 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1999). “75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(a). 7 Appellees are precisely the type of individuals who underinsured motorist coverage was designed to protect— individuals injured by a tortfeasor with inadequate insurance coverage.”
— 75 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 1781(c) — 1 case
Petty, T. v. Federated Mut. Ins., 152 A.3d 1020 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016). “This waiver signed by MeQuillen contains a verbatim recitation of the language used in 75 Pa.C.S. § 1781(c). In reviewing the application of statutory requirements, “[cjourts [ ] must not interpret a statute in a manner that leads to an absurd result.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.