Make sure you post your query within the 'message body' instead of the 'Subject'.
It'll simply help us respond to your query asap.
I do follow that you were involved in an at-fault accident and that you were not driving your own vehicle - but I couldn't get to your actual query.
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 12:16 pm Post Subject: accident
I'm asking this to any of the Experts, on the Forum. My friend let someone else drive his vehicle. The person, who drove his car, was in an accident...the accident was HIS fault. He was ALSO driving under the influence (DUI). The driver (of te friend's car) didn't have a valid DL. After this was 'all done and over with', the (at-fault) driver never turned this claim in (said he didin't have any Insurance) and my friend SWEARS he didn't know the driver didn't have a valid DL or Insurance. Also..my friend says, when HE turned it in to his Insurance, he said, "the Insurance company assumed it was ME driving, so, they had my DL taken away." This ENTIRE story sounds really 'fishy' to me. How is a 'procedure', like this, looked upon, by an Insurance company? Thanks.
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 12:35 pm Post Subject:
I'm asking this to any of the Experts, on the Forum.
I'm not an expert, so I'd request Lori, InsTeacher, Max, BNTRS and tcope to come to your aid.
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 08:14 pm Post Subject:
After this was 'all done and over with', the (at-fault) driver never turned this claim in (said he didin't have any Insurance) and my friend SWEARS he didn't know the driver didn't have a valid DL or Insurance
Would not matter anyway. Insurance would come from the policy where the vehicle as listed (the owner of the vehicle) and the driver would be considered an insured under the owners policy.
It's good to know who you loan a vehicle to... someone without a DL and then someone who uses the vehicle while drinking? Anyone want to guess why the driver does not have a DL?
Also..my friend says, when HE turned it in to his Insurance, he said, "the Insurance company assumed it was ME driving, so, they had my DL taken away
Nope... insurance companies don't take people's DL away (they can have them suspended if someone owes them money for a loss). Your friend's carrier "assumed" he was driving? Yeah... right! It never came up in conversation who he driver was.
How is a 'procedure', like this, looked upon, by an Insurance company
If I was the adjuster this person's policy would be flagged not to renew.... terrible risk on _so_ many levels!
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 05:12 am Post Subject:
In some auto policies I've seen here in California, the language specifically states that the coverage will be reduced to the minimum liability limits when a vehicle is driven by an unlisted driver. As for a driver without a DL, there could be a bigger problem if the reason he did not have a license was due to a suspension or revocation, because it could qualify as a "criminal" activity, and a common exclusion is operating the vehicle in the commission of a crime (sometimes, specifically, a felony -- insurance companies have fairly wide latitude to name exclusions).
As for "me driving" and losing his license -- that just makes no sense. A driver license is issued by the state, and only the state has the power to revoke it. Insurance companies cannot do this. So if your friend lost his license, there is far more to the story than what you've been told.
What may have happened is that his insurance has been cancelled for some reason (like using the vehicle in the commission of a crime) and when the news was reported to the state DMV (it's all done electronically in California and many other states these days), the state sent a notice to get new insurance or else, and if he didn't, then he might have gotten another letter giving him the news that his license has been suspended.
Here in California, when the DMV gets a first report of a lapse or cancellation, they wait a few days to see if new insurance pops up. If more than 7 to 10 days goes by without it, then the computer generates the letter indicating that there is now a limited time to obtain insurance before their license is suspended. Once that letter goes out, even if the individual subsequently does get the required coverage, the next time a lapse/cancellation is reported, the state has the right to immediately revoke the license without further notice. (sort of like, "Two strikes and you're out!")
It's always easy to put the blame on an insurance company. Most people will just agree that the BIG BAD INSURANCE COMPANIES are out to rip people off, even though they have no idea how things actually work. But in this case, the insurance company is not the bad guy.
Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 03:25 am Post Subject: Best Auto Insurance
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 07:57 am Post Subject:
Make sure you post your query within the 'message body' instead of the 'Subject'.
It'll simply help us respond to your query asap.
I do follow that you were involved in an at-fault accident and that you were not driving your own vehicle - but I couldn't get to your actual query.
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 12:16 pm Post Subject: accident
I'm asking this to any of the Experts, on the Forum. My friend let someone else drive his vehicle. The person, who drove his car, was in an accident...the accident was HIS fault. He was ALSO driving under the influence (DUI). The driver (of te friend's car) didn't have a valid DL. After this was 'all done and over with', the (at-fault) driver never turned this claim in (said he didin't have any Insurance) and my friend SWEARS he didn't know the driver didn't have a valid DL or Insurance. Also..my friend says, when HE turned it in to his Insurance, he said, "the Insurance company assumed it was ME driving, so, they had my DL taken away." This ENTIRE story sounds really 'fishy' to me. How is a 'procedure', like this, looked upon, by an Insurance company? Thanks.
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 12:35 pm Post Subject:
I'm asking this to any of the Experts, on the Forum.
I'm not an expert, so I'd request Lori, InsTeacher, Max, BNTRS and tcope to come to your aid.
Posted: Sat Sep 25, 2010 08:14 pm Post Subject:
After this was 'all done and over with', the (at-fault) driver never turned this claim in (said he didin't have any Insurance) and my friend SWEARS he didn't know the driver didn't have a valid DL or Insurance
Would not matter anyway. Insurance would come from the policy where the vehicle as listed (the owner of the vehicle) and the driver would be considered an insured under the owners policy.It's good to know who you loan a vehicle to... someone without a DL and then someone who uses the vehicle while drinking? Anyone want to guess why the driver does not have a DL?
Also..my friend says, when HE turned it in to his Insurance, he said, "the Insurance company assumed it was ME driving, so, they had my DL taken away
Nope... insurance companies don't take people's DL away (they can have them suspended if someone owes them money for a loss). Your friend's carrier "assumed" he was driving? Yeah... right! It never came up in conversation who he driver was.How is a 'procedure', like this, looked upon, by an Insurance company
If I was the adjuster this person's policy would be flagged not to renew.... terrible risk on _so_ many levels!Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2010 05:12 am Post Subject:
In some auto policies I've seen here in California, the language specifically states that the coverage will be reduced to the minimum liability limits when a vehicle is driven by an unlisted driver. As for a driver without a DL, there could be a bigger problem if the reason he did not have a license was due to a suspension or revocation, because it could qualify as a "criminal" activity, and a common exclusion is operating the vehicle in the commission of a crime (sometimes, specifically, a felony -- insurance companies have fairly wide latitude to name exclusions).
As for "me driving" and losing his license -- that just makes no sense. A driver license is issued by the state, and only the state has the power to revoke it. Insurance companies cannot do this. So if your friend lost his license, there is far more to the story than what you've been told.
What may have happened is that his insurance has been cancelled for some reason (like using the vehicle in the commission of a crime) and when the news was reported to the state DMV (it's all done electronically in California and many other states these days), the state sent a notice to get new insurance or else, and if he didn't, then he might have gotten another letter giving him the news that his license has been suspended.
Here in California, when the DMV gets a first report of a lapse or cancellation, they wait a few days to see if new insurance pops up. If more than 7 to 10 days goes by without it, then the computer generates the letter indicating that there is now a limited time to obtain insurance before their license is suspended. Once that letter goes out, even if the individual subsequently does get the required coverage, the next time a lapse/cancellation is reported, the state has the right to immediately revoke the license without further notice. (sort of like, "Two strikes and you're out!")
It's always easy to put the blame on an insurance company. Most people will just agree that the BIG BAD INSURANCE COMPANIES are out to rip people off, even though they have no idea how things actually work. But in this case, the insurance company is not the bad guy.
Posted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 03:25 am Post Subject: Best Auto Insurance
I have ever met this kind of situation before,here Best Auto Insurance Rate Review is the resource I found useful though.
Add your comment