Person A has no car, therefore no car insurance borrowed car from B.. Person B has insurance on their car. Person C (who's at fault) also had no insurance. Cop at scene (and 2 other claims adjusters) said Person B's insurance pays and goes after person C for the $$.
Person B contacts their insurance co and is told, No we're not paying, person A has to pay.
What is the correct answer, and please give reference. Accident occured in CA, if that makes a diff.
2007-02-07 12:24:26 · 12 answers · asked by tropical 4 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Insurance & Registration
Insurance follows vehicles, not drivers. So B's insurance is the active one here. But if person "C" at fault has no insurance it isn't likely you will get anything. "C" is responsible for your loss, and you could probably get a judgment against him, but how would you collect unless "C" happened to have assets you could attach. If "B" doesn't have collision on their policy or uninsured motorist coverage, the B's insurance could indeed say they were not going to pay. If there is coverage, they will pay, less any deductible amount in the policy. Unless A offers something they are basically off the hook here.
At any rate, find out your loss and send a demand for payment letter to C.
2007-02-07 12:33:59 · answer #1 · answered by oklatom 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
OK, this depends on the policy. If person A is not a household member, AND does not use the car regularly (aka, isn't a girlfriend or other person with regular access), most of the policies WILL PAY. If, however, listing person A as a driver would have caused an increase in premium, and the insurance company suspects that the whole driver a/driver b thing is an attempt at insurance fraud, they will investigate to determine the relationship between A and B, and why/how often the car is borrowed. And will likely insist that the owner of the car either EXCLUDES that person from all future coverage, or adds them as a scheduled driver.
Anyway. If person A just borrowed the car on a fluke, never did it before and never will again, then policy B should pay, IF there is collision coverage. If there's no collision coverage, well, there isn't any coverage, and owner B can sue both driver A and driver C for damages, hoping to get them from one or the other.
In any case . . .if insurance company B insists they aren't going to pay . . you need to ask to have them put the declination IN WRITING, and the reason why. The ONLY valid reasons I can see are suspected insurance fraud between a & b, OR, no collision coverage in place.
2007-02-07 12:58:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If Person B has uninsured motorist coverage, then that insurance company will pay and eventually may go after person C for the damages. Otherwise, Person A or B will have to go after person C in court for the damages.
If Person A is listed as an "excluded driver" on Person B's policy, then the insurance company is not involved (even if the car is covered).
Please make sure you report this accident to DMV. Once this happens, DMV will demand from Person C evidence that the vehicle was insured on the day of the accident. If Person C does not (or can not) provide this proof, then Person C's license will be suspended until Person C gets and maintains insurance. If Person C continues to drive on a suspended license, their car will be impounded when they are stopped by the police. I live in California so I don't want Person C to come and hit MY car without insurance.
2007-02-08 04:30:31 · answer #3 · answered by sdatary 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Person's B insurance is primary, Person A's insurance would be secondary. Person's B carrier pays and subrogates against Person C. Pretty simple if ya ask me.
The only way Person's B insurance would not pay is if there is an exclusion on the policy stating ALL DRIVERS MUST BE LISTED ON THE POLICY...PERIOD. So since Person A is a non-listed driver, coverage can be denied. OR...if the circumstances surrounding Person A's usage of the vehicle is excluded, another cause for denial.
Person B needs to read their policy, and then ask their insurance company for an explanation.
In CA, the insurance follows the car first, driver second.
2007-02-07 14:28:18 · answer #4 · answered by bundysmom 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Always- the driver must have the insurance. Person A owes for the repair of the borrowed vehicle. Person B probably has uninsured motorist coverage but he wasn't driving. Person A can then sue person C to recover their expenses if he can show proof that C is at fault.
Some states say that driving without insurance makes you at fault even if the other motorist caused the accident. Maybe that is why B's insurance company is taking the position that A must pay even though C also had no insurance.
2007-02-07 12:44:47 · answer #5 · answered by pilot 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'm not sure about California, but HERE...the car is insured, not the driver....so insurance company for person A should be paying, and it sounds like they're playing person A to get out of it! If I were person A, I'd call a lawyer for free advice on this, because I think insurance company A is full of it.
2007-02-07 12:35:11 · answer #6 · answered by Lisa E 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
in california, coverage goes with the car. NOT the driver. Contact the insurance co. again. and if necessary the Depart of insurance..located in sacramento
The cop and the adjusters know the law.
Does person A have a valid license?
property and casualty license in california 5 years
2007-02-07 12:34:04 · answer #7 · answered by Chef Susy--Cookin it up! 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
in texas person b insurance cover person a if b lets a use his car.c is obligated to pay for b car but b may have uninsured motorist insurance then b insurance will pay for b car
2007-02-07 12:34:45 · answer #8 · answered by bozotexino 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Assuming there is valid coverage, B's insurance carrier should pay unless A is an excluded driver under B's policy.
2007-02-07 12:33:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Person B's insurance would cover the cost person c pays
2007-02-07 12:28:31 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋