by Guest » Sat Apr 26, 2008 12:57 am
My son is a licensed driver and insured under my policy - he's 17. He used my car yesterday and, unbeknownst to me, let his friend borrow the car. The friend hit a pedestrian and sped off. When my son found out he went to the scene of the accident and called the police.
I'm freaking out here. My son got a ticket for allowing someone without a proper license (the friend is 16 and has a learner's permit.) The friend was arrested.
I'm worried that my insurance is not going to cover this -they have yet to return my call. I am a single mom and do not own a home and have no assets. In fact my company just closed down after 30 years and I am getting by on unemployment. I'm afraid, considering the circumstances, that my insurance will not cover this accident and I will be sued.
I have no money and don't know what I'm going to do.
I'm freaking out here. My son got a ticket for allowing someone without a proper license (the friend is 16 and has a learner's permit.) The friend was arrested.
I'm worried that my insurance is not going to cover this -they have yet to return my call. I am a single mom and do not own a home and have no assets. In fact my company just closed down after 30 years and I am getting by on unemployment. I'm afraid, considering the circumstances, that my insurance will not cover this accident and I will be sued.
I have no money and don't know what I'm going to do.
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 04:38 am Post Subject:
The friend was arrested.
Was this friend a lady?
I must tell you that the youngsters are going to make you pay for their whims at all times..they would be busy at showing off (girls are often worse than guys at driving for this one cause..)
Now, once they get into it, they'll throw up their arms & depend on the parents to get them out of the picnic.
I don't see any reason for not affecting your premiums for the future..except that the girl won't get a proper license for quite sometime if this is supposed to be the beginning of her driving history.
Keep telling..Plasmahectic
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 04:57 am Post Subject:
Hi,
Premiums had already risen when you included your son within your policy...isn't it ?
I don't see any reason for not affecting your premiums for the future..
Now, it could just be an uphill task for you!
Why don't you go through the following discussion-
ampminsure.org/feedback/teenage-driver.html
Regards,
Rev*thegearman
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 05:10 am Post Subject:
Dear skulljunkie,
I see the only way out for you to come through discussions with your insurance co.
You have not informed me as to which state you're in right now!
Neither do I have any idea about the insurance that you have for your cover.
Believe me, had I been at your place, I'd have contacted my insurance co. (no matter once, twice or thrice) since they'd be the best people to guide at this juncture, may be they can tell you about whether they'd like to go for 'subrogation' for this particular case. Under such a process, if that friend is the proven at-fault party, then it might just be possible that your insurance would pay the pedestrian & then file a claim against your son's friend.
Do keep us updated regarding what follows!
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 11:50 am Post Subject:
Plasmahectic
Was this friend a lady?
what possible difference does that make? just curious your thought process here? :? I don't see where the OP is concerned about the premiums either? Where is that coming from guys? She's worried about the claim being paid, or am I missing something?skulljunkie, more than likely your carrier will be covering the loss if your son gave the friend permission to drive the vehicle, (which it sounds like)....in that case the driver would've been an insured under the policy...man what a mess though! I've handled many claims over the years with similar circumstances (kid lets friend drive without mom and dad's knowledge friend wrecks car) in all cases the claim was paid...so try not to worry just yet.....
If you just turned in the claim then it takes some time for it to be assigned to an adjuster etc....If you haven't heard something by monday start calling and don't stop till you talk with someone...
Is the ped ok?
Posted: Sat Apr 26, 2008 01:27 pm Post Subject:
I agree that most likely they will cover the loss. In many states the owner can be held liable for the accident. In this case, _you_ did nothing wrong and actually, you son did not do anything illegal that I can see. It's illegal for the driver to drive but not to give him the car to drive (???). Even in this case your policy should treat the driver as an insured and provide him/her coverage as mentioned. There is a possibility that the limit of your coverage may be reduced down to the state minimum but even if so, it seems like this should not be an issue.
Your son going back to the location was a _smart_ move on his part. But of course, giving a 3000lbs weapon to an unlicensed driver was a bonehead move. The proof of that was that the unlicensed driver hit someone... the additional proof is that he/she drove away. If I were you, I'd have a discussion with that unlicensed person's parents and hopefully they will treat this like their son/daughter having an accident in their car and punishment will be forthcoming (though I've seen many judges not allow the person to get their full licenses for several years as punishment). I also think you need to address this issue with your own son. Some people think getting their licenses means they can do whatever they want. Sometimes they need to realize that was is given can be taken away.
OP, it's the weekend... take a deep breath and relax. I'm betting your insurance company will call on Monday and it's _extremely_ unlikely that they would deny coverage.
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 03:48 pm Post Subject:
Skulljunkie I am very sorry to hear your story. I am glad to see that it should be covered and hope this helps calm you down. I also think it was a responsible and grown up thing for your son to go back to the accident sceene. Although like tscope said it was a boneheaded move to lend out the car at least he acted responsible when calling the cops. Stop back and let us know how things are working for you.
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 11:13 pm Post Subject: insurance
Ok...I read the ENTIRE thread. I may sound a bit 'ignorant' here, but, for someone to drive your car, does the OWNER have to have insurance to cover the driver,..or...does the DRIVER ( of someone else bsies the owner) have to have insurance to cover THEMSELVE? I never had anyone else drive my car, so, i don't really know. Hope I explained question clearly.
Posted: Mon Apr 28, 2008 11:44 pm Post Subject:
OK...been awhile since I've been here.
Regarding the OP, I too have no idea why the idea of it being a girl bears on anything in the OPs question. STICK TO THE FACTS!!
BUT, that being said, I think I may have to rain on this parade a bit. Under the guise of "permissive use," the person using the insured vehicle must (1) have the permission of the (typically) NAMED insured, and (2) this is the rain on the parade part, the permissive user must be a LICENSED driver.
This driver had a permit only. I don't see coverage applying in this case, unless there's something applicable to permissive use that I'm missing, and I don't normally miss much.
Comments?
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 12:26 am Post Subject: insurance
WOW!! That makes sense. However.....how about this. the person who has a Permit can drive with a Licensed driver in the car. Does 'this' not apply, to the situation?
Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2008 10:11 am Post Subject:
Hi Teach! great to see you again...well in my part of the world anyway...this claim is a cake walk...(regarding coverage)...the driver would be covered as having permissive use....our policys (didn't know any state that did) don't require a permissive driver to have a license, and anyone that has possession of the vehicle with permission can then grant permission to another...I've probably had 100 of these claims and all have been covered...EVEN when the owner/insured says, ''NO '"I"" would not have given permission to the driver'' fact is though they were still given permission by an insured driver...believe me early in my career I remember a few of these that I personally thought should be denied because the owner/named insured would not have (had they known) granted permission....still doesn't work that way...(atleast in the mighty state of MO)....
sdchargersfan, in most (all that I know of) insurance stays with the car...meaning that the coverage on the vehicle will always be primary...so if you loan someone your car, and they have a wreck....doesn't matter that you all agreed prior that their ins would cover an accident....it won't happen (with possible exception that you don't have collision coverage and the driver does)...the ins on the vehicle will be responsible.
Add your comment