Does section 13967, subdivision (c) of the California Motor Vehicle Accident Act exclude insurers from making restitution to the City?

Finally, construing the statute to exclude insurers does not lead to arbitrary and capricious results. The direct victim is still made whole, either through insurance or through restitution. The burden inherent in seeking a civil judgment then falls on the insurer, which in most cases is better able to "bear the costs and endure the rigors of seeking civil judgments." (Cf. People v. Downing, supra, 174 Cal.App.3d at p. 672, 220 Cal.Rptr. 225.)

Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that under the circumstances present here, the trial court was without authority to order restitution to the City. The fact section 13967, subdivision (c) permits a restitution order to be enforceable as a civil judgment, does not transform the disposal of any and all civil liability into a function of restitution in a criminal case. [19 Cal.App.4th 185] (Cf. People v. Richards (1976) 17 Cal.3d 614, 620,

Page 481