My son was backing a friends' car out of the driveway and knicked another parked car (it was dark and he did not see it). Who is responsible for paying?
Total Comments: 10
Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 02:04 am Post Subject:
Kweiss9822,
I backed into a car and crushed the driver's door, and the cost to repair it is $1275. Will you please write a check to pay for it? I'll send you my mailing address in a private message.
Just kidding! Your son is responsible. Was there ever a doubt?
Is your son a licensed driver with insurance? How much is the repair going to cost? If he has the cash to cover the repair, pay it and be done (but be sure he gets a written acknowledgment from the vehicle owner -- notarized would be a good idea -- that he paid for the damage). If the cost to repair is more than he can afford to pay, but he has insurance, his insurer will pay for his negligent act, and probably raise his premium at the next renewal to cover it.
Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 01:20 pm Post Subject:
Who is responsible for paying?
Insurance stays with the vehicle. Assuming your son was a premissive driver of this vehicle, the policy on the vehicle will pay for the damage to the other vehicle under it's PD coverage..now, if the vehicle is uninsured, let us know and we'll go there.. :wink:
Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 03:31 pm Post Subject:
Insurance stays with the vehicle. Assuming your son was a permissive driver of this vehicle
Short answer: Driver's insurance is primary, vehicle's coverage is secondary.
Long Answer: While true, coverage limits on the insured vehicle are often reduced to state minimums. Driver's personal auto policy is his primary coverage, and will be primary on a claim involving a non-owned auto. Vehicle's coverage is secondary to any other coverage, and would only pay as excess insurance. Read the policy to know for sure.
Additionally, most PAPs have contract language that waives insurer's liability for a claim if the vehicle is driven by an uninsured or unlicensed person with or without permission of the insured owner (as it may be relieved of liability in the event the vehicle is stolen). Read the policy to know for sure.
However, subrogation clauses in nearly all personal auto policies will also allow the insurer to go after the authorized driver's personal auto policy for recovery, and if insufficient, to go after the driver directly. Read the policy to know for sure.
The original question was: Who is responsible to pay?
A traffic collision is a civil tort. The answer remains, a cause of action may be brought first against the person who created the tort -- the driver. Additional negligence could attach to the insured owner of the vehicle if he knowingly permitted an unlicensed and/or uninsured person (or person with a known bad driving record) to drive the vehicle (culpable negligence).
The important language in the post is "Read the policy to know for sure." This is the one thing nearly all insureds AND agents fail to do.
Guess what the insurer's attorneys rarely fail to do?
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:52 am Post Subject:
Short answer: Driver's insurance is primary, vehicle's coverage is secondary.
Driver's personal auto policy is his primary coverage, and will be primary on a claim involving a non-owned auto. Vehicle's coverage is secondary to any other coverage, and would only pay as excess insurance. Read the policy to know for sure.
Well Max since you posted the direct opposite of what I did...guess (hoping-maybe?) we have a 'state' thing going on here...In my state and the adjoining ones (and any other 'out side' states that I've had the pleasure to read their policy) that I've handled claims in, this couldn't be wronger...the insurance ALWAYS stays with the car...the vehicle ins. is ALWAYS primary..always...if the driver of the vehicle has permissive use...(even regardless of the drivers 'wish' to use his own policy)..the vehicle policy (again) is ALWAYS primary.
I must handle oh, I'd say 3-4 'unlisted driver' losses a week, take that times 20 years..that's a lot of ULD claims..not one time has the drivers carrier paid unless the vehicle being driven had no coverage.
Additional negligence could attach to the insured owner of the vehicle if he knowingly permitted an unlicensed and/or uninsured person (or person with a known bad driving record) to drive the vehicle (culpable negligence).
So what you're saying is...that in your state, the only way the vehicles insurance is brought into the claim is if the driver had a poor driving record? Or as a secondary coverage, AFTER the drivers policy paid? :?
I'm going to pull a CA policy later today and look at it...admittedly I don't work claims in CA...but again..never seen this to be true..
Now, the question was Who is responsible to pay? I agree that the driver is responsible for the accident...but I ascert if the driver had permission to drive that (assuming insured) vehicle..that vehicles insurance is the one that will be required to pay that bill.
On another board...appears to be a similar question with an answer provided by a claims supervisor in CA...she/he says this..
I can tell you as an auto claims supervisor in the state of California that "insurance follows the vehicle". From the different answers here, it sounds like the process is different for each state.
Fact in California is that the company covering the car would be the primary insurance company covering an accident. It wouldn't have mattered if your friend did have insurance or not. The only way it would NOT have gone on your insurance in the state of California is
1) You specifically excluded that particular person on your policy from receiving coverage while driving
2) You have purchased a cheap policy which does not allow unlisted drivers to drive your cars and receive coverage (not likely, but I know Farmers used to write a policy like that. Most major insurance companies don't write the policies that way)
3) Your insurance was not valid for the loss for some reason (not paying premium or an unlisted vehicle) and then his insurance would become secondary if he did have insurance.
-----
Since it sounds like your insurance was valid, your policy would pay for it. While you may not have been coded at fault yourself, it would be an at fault accident that required a third party liability payout which could raise your rates regardless of whether you were driving or not. Specifically, your policy would be considered more risky because there are people driving your vehicles that cause accidents. While this is not what you wanted to hear, it is reality.
Based on the different answers above, maybe if you added a note about what state you are from, the answer could be more accurate for you.
Another thing to question is whether you carry enough coverage for all the damage that was caused. If not, your friend may still qualify for coverage under his parents policies if he lives with them. I'd follow up on these to questions if you have a policy with low liability limits.
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 01:45 pm Post Subject:
I am in the state of Alabama. And the estimate for the damage is $1,500. My insurance (which covers my son as driver) is a $1,000 deductible. Should I involve my insurance or should the owner of the vehicle of the car he was driving make the claim?
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 02:17 pm Post Subject:
Your $1000 deductible is for collision/comprehensive coverage and applies to damage to your own vehicle only. It does not apply to the other person's vehicle.
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:11 pm Post Subject:
Driver's personal auto policy is his primary coverage, and will be primary on a claim involving a non-owned auto. Vehicle's coverage is secondary to any other coverage, and would only pay as excess insurance.
Everything was pretty much spot on until this. I think you were on the right track just backwards.
The policy that lists the vehicle is going to be primary. A policy addressing the vehicle as a non-owed auto is going to be excess.
Who is responsible in this case depends on state laws. Some states hold the driver liable only. Other states hold the driver and owner liable.
Who's policy reacts is the main issue. In the case above the driver would be considered an insured under the owners policy and since the vehicle is listed on the owners policy, the owners policy would react as primary coverage (for the drivers as an insured even if the owner does not have an exposure in that state). The drivers liability insurance would be excess as it's a non-owned vehicle.
Part of the difference here is who is liable and who's insurance would react. Two different things mainly with the same results as the driver, being a permissive user, would be an "insured" under the owners policy.
I'd say everything else posted by Max was dead on and detailed.
So what you're saying is...that in your state, the only way the vehicles insurance is brought into the claim is if the driver had a poor driving record? Or as a secondary coverage, AFTER the drivers policy paid?
Other then Max having the driver/owners policy backward on being prime/excess, yes... I think things in the west are a little funky like that. Many times the owner of the vehicle can't be sued... only if there is some type of negligent entrustment as Max kind of mentioned. But this is _really_ hard to establish.
Again, it's all really moot as the driver in this case would be an insured under the owners policy.... same result for the insurance company of the owner.
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:44 pm Post Subject:
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 01:13 am Post Subject: insurance not covering another driver
I was rear ended by a car and that person gave me insurance information at time of accident. Got a call from the insurance adjuster that the driver was not insured that it was his uncle's policy and car. Insurance adjuster says they will not pay a claim to me. This is in state of Texas.
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 03:49 am Post Subject:
It's possible that there is no coverage if the driver was using the vehicle without permission. But I think the policy covering the vehicle may cover the claim if the driver's use was permissive.
Then again, in Texas, who knows? It's a legal world unto its own.
Submit the claim to your insurance company and let them determine if it's payable under your uninsured or if they can recover from the owner's insurance company.
Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 02:04 am Post Subject:
Kweiss9822,
I backed into a car and crushed the driver's door, and the cost to repair it is $1275. Will you please write a check to pay for it? I'll send you my mailing address in a private message.
Just kidding! Your son is responsible. Was there ever a doubt?
Is your son a licensed driver with insurance? How much is the repair going to cost? If he has the cash to cover the repair, pay it and be done (but be sure he gets a written acknowledgment from the vehicle owner -- notarized would be a good idea -- that he paid for the damage). If the cost to repair is more than he can afford to pay, but he has insurance, his insurer will pay for his negligent act, and probably raise his premium at the next renewal to cover it.
Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 01:20 pm Post Subject:
Who is responsible for paying?
Insurance stays with the vehicle. Assuming your son was a premissive driver of this vehicle, the policy on the vehicle will pay for the damage to the other vehicle under it's PD coverage..now, if the vehicle is uninsured, let us know and we'll go there.. :wink:Posted: Sun Apr 18, 2010 03:31 pm Post Subject:
Insurance stays with the vehicle. Assuming your son was a permissive driver of this vehicle
Short answer: Driver's insurance is primary, vehicle's coverage is secondary.
Long Answer: While true, coverage limits on the insured vehicle are often reduced to state minimums. Driver's personal auto policy is his primary coverage, and will be primary on a claim involving a non-owned auto. Vehicle's coverage is secondary to any other coverage, and would only pay as excess insurance. Read the policy to know for sure.
Additionally, most PAPs have contract language that waives insurer's liability for a claim if the vehicle is driven by an uninsured or unlicensed person with or without permission of the insured owner (as it may be relieved of liability in the event the vehicle is stolen). Read the policy to know for sure.
However, subrogation clauses in nearly all personal auto policies will also allow the insurer to go after the authorized driver's personal auto policy for recovery, and if insufficient, to go after the driver directly. Read the policy to know for sure.
The original question was: Who is responsible to pay?
A traffic collision is a civil tort. The answer remains, a cause of action may be brought first against the person who created the tort -- the driver. Additional negligence could attach to the insured owner of the vehicle if he knowingly permitted an unlicensed and/or uninsured person (or person with a known bad driving record) to drive the vehicle (culpable negligence).
The important language in the post is "Read the policy to know for sure." This is the one thing nearly all insureds AND agents fail to do.
Guess what the insurer's attorneys rarely fail to do?
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:52 am Post Subject:
Short answer: Driver's insurance is primary, vehicle's coverage is secondary.
Driver's personal auto policy is his primary coverage, and will be primary on a claim involving a non-owned auto. Vehicle's coverage is secondary to any other coverage, and would only pay as excess insurance. Read the policy to know for sure.
Well Max since you posted the direct opposite of what I did...guess (hoping-maybe?) we have a 'state' thing going on here...In my state and the adjoining ones (and any other 'out side' states that I've had the pleasure to read their policy) that I've handled claims in, this couldn't be wronger...the insurance ALWAYS stays with the car...the vehicle ins. is ALWAYS primary..always...if the driver of the vehicle has permissive use...(even regardless of the drivers 'wish' to use his own policy)..the vehicle policy (again) is ALWAYS primary.
I must handle oh, I'd say 3-4 'unlisted driver' losses a week, take that times 20 years..that's a lot of ULD claims..not one time has the drivers carrier paid unless the vehicle being driven had no coverage.
Additional negligence could attach to the insured owner of the vehicle if he knowingly permitted an unlicensed and/or uninsured person (or person with a known bad driving record) to drive the vehicle (culpable negligence).
So what you're saying is...that in your state, the only way the vehicles insurance is brought into the claim is if the driver had a poor driving record? Or as a secondary coverage, AFTER the drivers policy paid? :?I'm going to pull a CA policy later today and look at it...admittedly I don't work claims in CA...but again..never seen this to be true..
Now, the question was Who is responsible to pay? I agree that the driver is responsible for the accident...but I ascert if the driver had permission to drive that (assuming insured) vehicle..that vehicles insurance is the one that will be required to pay that bill.
On another board...appears to be a similar question with an answer provided by a claims supervisor in CA...she/he says this..
I can tell you as an auto claims supervisor in the state of California that "insurance follows the vehicle". From the different answers here, it sounds like the process is different for each state.
-----Fact in California is that the company covering the car would be the primary insurance company covering an accident. It wouldn't have mattered if your friend did have insurance or not. The only way it would NOT have gone on your insurance in the state of California is
1) You specifically excluded that particular person on your policy from receiving coverage while driving
2) You have purchased a cheap policy which does not allow unlisted drivers to drive your cars and receive coverage (not likely, but I know Farmers used to write a policy like that. Most major insurance companies don't write the policies that way)
3) Your insurance was not valid for the loss for some reason (not paying premium or an unlisted vehicle) and then his insurance would become secondary if he did have insurance.
Since it sounds like your insurance was valid, your policy would pay for it. While you may not have been coded at fault yourself, it would be an at fault accident that required a third party liability payout which could raise your rates regardless of whether you were driving or not. Specifically, your policy would be considered more risky because there are people driving your vehicles that cause accidents. While this is not what you wanted to hear, it is reality.
Based on the different answers above, maybe if you added a note about what state you are from, the answer could be more accurate for you.
Another thing to question is whether you carry enough coverage for all the damage that was caused. If not, your friend may still qualify for coverage under his parents policies if he lives with them. I'd follow up on these to questions if you have a policy with low liability limits.
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 01:45 pm Post Subject:
I am in the state of Alabama. And the estimate for the damage is $1,500. My insurance (which covers my son as driver) is a $1,000 deductible. Should I involve my insurance or should the owner of the vehicle of the car he was driving make the claim?
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 02:17 pm Post Subject:
Your $1000 deductible is for collision/comprehensive coverage and applies to damage to your own vehicle only. It does not apply to the other person's vehicle.
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:11 pm Post Subject:
Driver's personal auto policy is his primary coverage, and will be primary on a claim involving a non-owned auto. Vehicle's coverage is secondary to any other coverage, and would only pay as excess insurance.
Everything was pretty much spot on until this. I think you were on the right track just backwards.The policy that lists the vehicle is going to be primary. A policy addressing the vehicle as a non-owed auto is going to be excess.
Who is responsible in this case depends on state laws. Some states hold the driver liable only. Other states hold the driver and owner liable.
Who's policy reacts is the main issue. In the case above the driver would be considered an insured under the owners policy and since the vehicle is listed on the owners policy, the owners policy would react as primary coverage (for the drivers as an insured even if the owner does not have an exposure in that state). The drivers liability insurance would be excess as it's a non-owned vehicle.
Part of the difference here is who is liable and who's insurance would react. Two different things mainly with the same results as the driver, being a permissive user, would be an "insured" under the owners policy.
I'd say everything else posted by Max was dead on and detailed.
So what you're saying is...that in your state, the only way the vehicles insurance is brought into the claim is if the driver had a poor driving record? Or as a secondary coverage, AFTER the drivers policy paid?
Other then Max having the driver/owners policy backward on being prime/excess, yes... I think things in the west are a little funky like that. Many times the owner of the vehicle can't be sued... only if there is some type of negligent entrustment as Max kind of mentioned. But this is _really_ hard to establish.Again, it's all really moot as the driver in this case would be an insured under the owners policy.... same result for the insurance company of the owner.
Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 11:44 pm Post Subject:
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 01:13 am Post Subject: insurance not covering another driver
I was rear ended by a car and that person gave me insurance information at time of accident. Got a call from the insurance adjuster that the driver was not insured that it was his uncle's policy and car. Insurance adjuster says they will not pay a claim to me. This is in state of Texas.
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 03:49 am Post Subject:
It's possible that there is no coverage if the driver was using the vehicle without permission. But I think the policy covering the vehicle may cover the claim if the driver's use was permissive.
Then again, in Texas, who knows? It's a legal world unto its own.
Submit the claim to your insurance company and let them determine if it's payable under your uninsured or if they can recover from the owner's insurance company.
Add your comment