Car accident. Party at fault is insured, but driver is not on policy (rental, insurance)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of my family members was hit on a 3 lane road when a car failed to stop for a stop sign (coming out of a small street). My family member was driving in the middle lane and there are a lot of traffic lights on that road which lead/coming off, the Interstate.
The car my family member was driving has an insurance tracker which showed nothing out of the ordinary and registered the time of the trip made.
My family member had a passenger in the car and either the passenger or my family member called the cops.
Both parties stayed on the scene and insurance was exchanged. The cops didn’t ticket anyone but the cop mentioned the report will mention that the other car was at fault. We have not yet received the report. (Accident occurred during July’s Holiday)
The party at fault, insurance company has not able to be in contact with their insured person who was NOT in the car. Their insurance claims to have 30 days to speak to the person and get info while this driver was driving her car. When I spoke with the adjuster of that company he mentioned we need to know why the car was in this persons possession. I told the adjuster that if the car was stolen, I doubt the driver would have stayed on the scene.
This morning I checked the name of the driver online and at a minimum 10 felonies show up in his name. Also driving without a license in many cases, but the last case dates back to 2006. Not one case is a misdemeanor but all felonies so this person doesn’t have a good track record. Felony driving records, theft, etc.
Does anyone know if the insurance for the other driver can deny the claim due to the insured person not being in the car?
I thought drivers are at all times responsible for their car unless the car was stolen but then their insurance should still be paying and going after the thief, IF the person is known. In this case all names of people in the other car are on the driver exchange report.
Any input from someone who has experience with this matter is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
You pay insurance for a reason, while it will be nice to see replies from insurance professionals on this forum, your best bet is to turn all this over to your insurance professional and let them handle it. You tell your insurer your timetable for getting the car fixed, they pay for everything. It is their job to make a bad situation as seamless as possible for you.
They will go after the other insurance company for any payments they contribute to cover your loss.
My own personal opinion:
30 days?? Pfft! 24 hours is about it, maybe 48. If it was stolen, there is a police record of it before the accident. In the meantime, get me a rental to replace my loss. If I don't hear back by the second day, I get estimates and get the car repair/replacement underway. Time is money, both for me and the insurance company. They stall and drag their feet, I move along and pile up their bills for them. If they want input (limited) into how I spend their money to extricated myself from their party's fault, they need to come to me with a plan going forward. Waiting 30 days is not a plan, it's a stall.
One of my family members was hit on a 3 lane road when a car failed to stop for a stop sign (coming out of a small street). My family member was driving in the middle lane and there are a lot of traffic lights on that road which lead/coming off, the Interstate.
The car my family member was driving has an insurance tracker which showed nothing out of the ordinary and registered the time of the trip made.
My family member had a passenger in the car and either the passenger or my family member called the cops.
Both parties stayed on the scene and insurance was exchanged. The cops didn’t ticket anyone but the cop mentioned the report will mention that the other car was at fault. We have not yet received the report. (Accident occurred during July’s Holiday)
The party at fault, insurance company has not able to be in contact with their insured person who was NOT in the car. Their insurance claims to have 30 days to speak to the person and get info while this driver was driving her car. When I spoke with the adjuster of that company he mentioned we need to know why the car was in this persons possession. I told the adjuster that if the car was stolen, I doubt the driver would have stayed on the scene.
This morning I checked the name of the driver online and at a minimum 10 felonies show up in his name. Also driving without a license in many cases, but the last case dates back to 2006. Not one case is a misdemeanor but all felonies so this person doesn’t have a good track record. Felony driving records, theft, etc.
Does anyone know if the insurance for the other driver can deny the claim due to the insured person not being in the car?
I thought drivers are at all times responsible for their car unless the car was stolen but then their insurance should still be paying and going after the thief, IF the person is known. In this case all names of people in the other car are on the driver exchange report.
Any input from someone who has experience with this matter is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
Insurance virtually everywhere covers the named insured under the policy while he/she operates the motor vehicle and it includes all persons who are "permissive drivers" of the vehicle. In other words, if the named insured gave the driver express or implied permission to operate the car he is covered under the policy as well.
I suppose there may be exceptions to this rule in some states. On exception that would occur to me is if a particular person was expressly excluded from coverage under the policy.
Read the "thirty days" you've been told as the very longest time this may take. It will probably take considerably less time.
I will note one thing I have been noticing with my clients is that the time it takes insurance adjusters to take care of property damage has increased. I used to get this stuff done for clients in a week or less. Now its routinely taking two to three weeks.
When a personal injury is involved it pays to hire a lawyer because the threats that I can make get insurance adjusters to move a case like this more quickly. However, I'm assuming there are no personal injuries here because you don't say that there are.
One of my family members was hit on a 3 lane road when a car failed to stop for a stop sign (coming out of a small street). My family member was driving in the middle lane and there are a lot of traffic lights on that road which lead/coming off, the Interstate.
The car my family member was driving has an insurance tracker which showed nothing out of the ordinary and registered the time of the trip made.
My family member had a passenger in the car and either the passenger or my family member called the cops.
Both parties stayed on the scene and insurance was exchanged. The cops didn’t ticket anyone but the cop mentioned the report will mention that the other car was at fault. We have not yet received the report. (Accident occurred during July’s Holiday)
The party at fault, insurance company has not able to be in contact with their insured person who was NOT in the car. Their insurance claims to have 30 days to speak to the person and get info while this driver was driving her car. When I spoke with the adjuster of that company he mentioned we need to know why the car was in this persons possession. I told the adjuster that if the car was stolen, I doubt the driver would have stayed on the scene.
This morning I checked the name of the driver online and at a minimum 10 felonies show up in his name. Also driving without a license in many cases, but the last case dates back to 2006. Not one case is a misdemeanor but all felonies so this person doesn’t have a good track record. Felony driving records, theft, etc.
Does anyone know if the insurance for the other driver can deny the claim due to the insured person not being in the car?
I thought drivers are at all times responsible for their car unless the car was stolen but then their insurance should still be paying and going after the thief, IF the person is known. In this case all names of people in the other car are on the driver exchange report.
Any input from someone who has experience with this matter is appreciated. Thanks in advance.
I am an underwriter and was an auto claims adjuster for 10 years prior to underwriting.
- you don't say what state the loss occurred. Insurance goes by statutory law, so location is important in the ability to answer your questions
- liability covers the vehicle, so regardless of who was driving, the liability of the car itself would follow
- yes, the insurance company may be able to deny if they cannot contact their policy holder. This for a couple of reasons: the insurance contract is between the carrier and the signatory, or primary insured. Each is obligated to the other ONLY. Ethically, the carrier (arguably) should not proceed without the conversation with their signatory. Often times they do, because in the long run they are better protecting their client (and their own interests, per paying for lawsuit defense) to go ahead and accept liability. Secondly, if there is any question on coverage- examples could include but are not limited to: payments made on time, new vehicle on policy, new driver on policy, etc - and they cannot clear that up by speaking with their insured, they kind of have to deny coverage for the loss ("soft" denial, meaning they can clear it up by speaking to them)
- the driver could be an exluded driver on the policy. Laws about excluded drivers are very different state to state so again, knowing where the loss happened is important
- if the car is truly stolen by some unknown perpetrator, chances are a denial. If it was stolen because their 14 yr old grabbed the keys for a joy ride, often the claim will be accepted on the case of "implied permissive use". It would be explained to the primary insured how accepting responsibility is best for them in the long run in the case of the latter
- finally, soap box moment for me, it is the responsibility of every driver to mitigate their own damages. IN a perfect world every person would take responsibility for their own mistakes. But in all cases, not just insurance, we know this does not happen. Every single time a person gets behind the wheel of a car, the y are in effect signing a contract to say "I understand the risks I am taking by being on a roadway with a bunch of imperfect humans attempting to guide what could potentially be a deadly weapon. I am willing to take that risk, and mitigate any damages promptly per my contract with xyz insurance company"
Sorry for not mentioning the State, which is Florida.
The insurance adjuster did not say that the person was excluded from the policy but that the person who drove was unknown to them (insurance company, and not on the policy as an excluded party) which me believe that the person was NOT excluded or the adjuster could not mention that the person was unknown.
No personal injuries. pff luckily!
Due to this accident happening on the 4th, we understand that most people had taken off and offices closed for the next days, which causes a delay and luckily we have a car that was not used and the car is drivable. Just some dents and scratched from a little bit back from back seat passenger side door, all the way up to front rim.
If the owner of the car can't be reached, is that a reason for a claim to be denied? By not making this a hit and run, even though the driver has a terrible driving record as most felonies are related to driving, but the latest in the County where he lives (not sure about other Counties/States), are not showing any records after 2006, so this person who is now 47, may have "changed" his life and stopped behaving like all the felonies up to 2006 are showing. Although there is a still an open balance to the court for over $ 800.-.
The adjuster had asked for pictures and based on the pictures, made an online estimate/guestimate. Since the car is black it is more difficult to see the dents as the reflection makes that harder to show in a picture.
Per adjusters statement, he does not need to see the car and we can have it fixed at a place of our choice but he wants to wait for the accident report and mentioned up to 30 days to get in contact with owner of the car.
IF we use our insurance we risk our premium to go up, which we do not want to happen.
The adjuster used a lot of "if" and "may" which I'm very familiar with...
If the owner of the car can't be reached, is that a reason for a claim to be denied?
Yes. The other car's owner has a contract with his company that requires that he cooperate with his insurer in the event of a claim. If he fails to respond, fails to cooperate, coverage can be denied to him which, in turn, means that your claim is also denied.
If you don't like the wait, have your damage covered by your own policy. Your rates shouldn't go up if you are not at fault.
Otherwise, be patient until the other company, the one that has no legal obligation to you, gets ready to take care of the claim.
Yes. The other car's owner has a contract with his company that requires that he cooperate with his insurer in the event of a claim. If he fails to respond, fails to cooperate, coverage can be denied to him which, in turn, means that your claim is also denied.
If you don't like the wait, have your damage covered by your own policy. Your rates shouldn't go up if you are not at fault.
Otherwise, be patient until the other company, the one that has no legal obligation to you, gets ready to take care of the claim.
Some states though have an insurance code which prohibits insurers from asserting "non-cooperation" as a defense against a claim filed by a third party. It has to do with financial responsibility laws and their underlying purpose. One example is in here in Utah. See UCA 31A-22-303 (6).
Some states though have an insurance code which prohibits insurers from asserting "non-cooperation" as a defense against a claim filed by a third party. It has to do with financial responsibility laws and their underlying purpose. One example is in here in Utah. See UCA 31A-22-303 (6).
True. But that doesn't stop the claims people from just waiting until contact is made, even without denying the claim. The obligation is to their insured, not to the third party claimant.
True. But that doesn't stop the claims people from just waiting until contact is made, even without denying the claim. The obligation is to their insured, not to the third party claimant.
Not in all states, such as Texas.
The purpose of this Bulletin is to remind insurers of their responsibilities to first and third party claimants regarding claim payments for damage to motor vehicles.
Texas Administrative Code, Section 5.501 requires an insurer to provide a notice to the insured or third-party claimant who makes a claim regarding damage to a vehicle.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
