I fail to see why being asked to drive your own vehicle would make any difference. Remember that the OP is not at fault anyway so why would the above matter.
Even if the OP was at fault it still would not change anything. Law states that the owner and/or driver are responsible and need to carry insurance. So the OP's policy be prime as the vehicle is listed on that policy. As the OP was working at the time, the pizza place's insurance would only be excess.
But again, the OP was not liable in the accident so the OP's insurance situation is not an issue.
Especially when they came out with the "Car Driver" agreement after this accident. I checked their employee handbook and it has no stipulations about what kind of coverage, let along what happens in the event of an accident. It just says you need a valid drivers license and valid insurance. Not what kind of insurance just valid insurance.
I will contact a lawyer and see if I can purse this now. Thanks. _________________ Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
I fail to see why being asked to drive your own vehicle would make any difference.
Well usually I don't drive my own vehical. I drive a company truck.
Their truck was out, so I was asked to drive my vehical.
If I didn't drive I wasn't going to make any money and I would of been out of a shift which I couldn't afford to do.
As far as the accident goes, that would be between me and the other party. But I always felt my company shared some of the blame of my misfourtunte since they put me in the position. They came out with documentation dealing with the situation 2-3 weeks after it covering themselves. Seemed kind of odd to me. _________________ Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
Law states that the owner and/or driver are responsible and need to carry insurance. So the OP's policy be prime as the vehicle is listed on that policy. As the OP was working at the time, the pizza place's insurance would only be excess.
right but the OP's carrier denied it...based (I assume) on business use...and I'm not so sure that as far as his injry is concerned that work copm wouldn't be primary....Iatlelast in my state that's what they told me when I was in a wreck in a company vehicle not my fault incidently ).....If he was not compensated either in mileage or some way he certainly has a claim with them for that...my thought was (course too late now) that he would've had another option to look for payment as far as his vehicle's total.. _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
There are several different issued and some confusion rolled into one...
OP, your company would not have any responsibility to you in this accident other then possibly providing workers compensation. If you file a claim under WC, your employer will most likely have immunity to any claim you might have against them (which would be no claim anyway... they did not cause your loss).
I understand that they asked you to drive your vehicle and that you usually use one of their vehicles. It would be nice if you both had an agreement that they would pay you for using your own vehicle and this really would make the whole situation fair. Again, it's not your employers fault that someone else damaged your vehicle. I'm betting there is no company on earth that would offer to address all of their employees loss in this type of situation (it's not appropriate as they don't owe it and the other party would address the loss).
Keep in mind that it does sound like your employer maintained workers compensation coverage and that this company is initially addressing your medical expenses. So your company _is_ doing something for you.
As far as your company requiring that you maintain insurance... this is complicated. First, if your driving a company vehicle (how many pizza places supply vehicles? That is a good deal), their insurance would be primary and you'd be an insured under their policy. If you also had insurance yourself, it would be above and beyond what the companies carrier would offer. Second, even if you showed your employer proof of insurance, it's not likely that your policy would offer coverage (as pointed out in this thread) as many policies contain an exclusion for using the vehicle to deliver items as a part of a business. Your employer would likely not know about this exclusion so they would _think_ that you have coverage. Lastly, if you drive your own vehicle while working, your policy is going to address any loss first. The policy for the company you work for is going to be above and beyond what your own policy would address. But in your situation your policy would not provide any coverage so the companies policy steps in on dollar one (they also can't collect money back from you as your insurance under their policy). But keep in mind that this is all liability coverage (when _you_ cause an accident) so it does not need to apply here.
See... told you it was confusing! And that is not even all of the story.
OP, if workers compensation is paying for your medical expenses then the other carrier will need to pay them directly. Workers Compensation carriers I think have something called a "super lien"... meaning, even if they don't tell the carrier paying the loss thaty they are owed money prior to that carrier settling the claim, the WC carrier can _always_ require that they be paid. So the at fault parties carrier would end up paying part of the claim twice. I'm _pretty_ sure a WC carrier can do this. This woudl mean that you would not have the opportunity to get the medical bills lowered. But keep in mind that a WC carrier usually pays a reduced bill... not the one the medical providers send to you. So your actual medical bills might be lower then $6000. But this also means time is on your side. You don't have to rush into a settlement in order to get your medical bills paid.
If he was not compensated either in mileage or some way he certainly has a claim with them for that...my thought was (course too late now) that he would've had another option to look for payment as far as his vehicle's total
I doubt the commercial policy is going to provide 1st party coverage to a vehicle the named insured does not own. Most commercial policies are going to have a 7 or 8 coverage symbol for collision coverage, which would not include vehicles they don't own. But now you're going to ask me if symbol 8 (Hire Auto Only) would include the OP's car if the company paid him mileage (which is why you raised that issue). Ummmm.... don't ask me that okay.... the other carrier is handling the OP's PD. (plus we don't know what symbols the pizza place has for collision coverage... they might not even have collision).
TRUE...honestly I doubt that their policy would cover him either, however I'm not so sure a jury or judge wouldn't find them liable for the damage to his vehicle had the facts been different...would you agree to that? _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
Find the pizza company liable for the damage to the OP's car if the OP ran into a wall or hit someone? Nope.... not a chance. In that case the OP would be responsible (liable) for the damage to the car. Look at it this way... what did the employer do to cause the damage to the vehicle? They did not run it into a wall or another vehicle. I'm guessing your thinking because the asked the employee to use his/her own vehicle that this makes them responsible for what happens to the car. Nope. They can feel bad about asking the OP to use his/her own vehicle and that he/she damaged it but a bad feeling is about as far as that goes.
I worked as an independent adjuster for several years and had to drive my own vehicle. The company paid me $.48/mile. This was to compensate me for the use of my vehicle, wear/tear, gas and _insurance_. I'm hoping that the OP was compensated as well but if not, that is the deal that was made. Still no liability against the pizza place.
Find the pizza company liable for the damage to the OP's car if the OP ran into a wall or hit someone? Nope.... not a chance.
I respectfully disagree..the OP was not an independent contractor like you were...they ask him to use his vehicle in a 'pinch' it wasn't a regular thing....I think had the situation be reversed his carrier would have denied both his collision loss and the pd and any bi loss to the party he hit....I think (in this case) the pizza shoppe would have a hard time not providing him with protection (not the insurance company but the owners/corp whatever).....This is a unique situation and wasn't a condition of his employment....I too for a year had to drive my own vehicle and was paid 36 cents a mile...I did of course call my carrier and added the necessary endorcement to cover me for buisness use...but that wouldn't be the case here....He of course would be liable as well for the action of (let's say) rearending someone, but I still think that a judge or jury would firmly place that pizza shop on the hook as well. But hey I'm wrong about a million times a day....
Quote:
what did the employer do to cause the damage to the vehicle?
He put that vehicle on the road....What did our employers do wrong when we drive company cars everyday? Then all of a sudden, rearend two attorneys, (like I did ) They did nothing wrong other than putting me behind the wheel..which is exactly what his employer did....I don't know T, course this is a fun off shoot and not at all what happened in this OP, but as we adjusters tend to do the ''well, what if'' _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
I was not an independent contractor, I was a salaried employee. But you'd not know it from my paychecks.
They asked the OP to use his vehicle and I think he should be paid for that use. They did not ask him to (in the hypothetical situation of him causing damage to his vehicle) to damage his own vehicle. If they asked him to use a vehicle they knew was faulty or ask him to drive in an area where they should have known his vehicle would become damaged, etc.. then, yes, they may be liable for the damage to his vehicle. But I think you can see the difference. If the _OP_ causes the damage, only he is liable for that damage.
Quote:
but I still think that a judge or jury would firmly place that pizza shop on the hook as well.
Are you talking about liability? Because I think we were discussing damage to the OP's car. Liability is a different matter and falls under what I mentioned a few posts ago. I think you are talking about liability as you mentioned adding coverage under your policy to address your business use. You'd not need to change anything on your collision/comprehensive coverage as this would apply regardless (no?).
Quote:
He put that vehicle on the road....What did our employers do wrong when we drive company cars everyday?
The employer did not put the vehicle on the road but also, putting the vehicle in the road did not cause any damage! It was the driver's actions (hitting another vehicle or a wall) that caused the loss! I'm guessing they did not tell him to do that. Our employers for company cars did not do anything wrong... it's _their_ vehicle. They own it. So they are held liable. We, as employees, are considered an insured under their policy for liability coverage so we get primary liability coverage under their policy. If we cause damage to the company vehicle the companies policy could pay for the loss as the vehicle is listed under their policy with collision coverage. If the carrier pay, they cannot go against the driver for a liability claim as the same policy provides liability coverage to the driver (they'd be collecting from themselves).
But in any case, the pizza place would not be _liable_ for the employees damaged vehicle is the employee caused that damage. Even if they asked him/her to use his/her own vehicle.
I was told by the companies insurance company that......insurance follows the driver. (Not the vehical.) So I would have been liable no matter what. Their insurance wouldn't cover me at all.
The Workmans comp company said, since I wasn't seriously injured that we were done talking. Then they sent a letter to the ladys insurance company saying they were 100% reponsible for the medical bills and wouldn't pay a cent. Basically along those lines.
I had also heard from a couple of the store managers. That the reason for the "car driver" agreement was because they were afraid I was going to sue. Now I'm not sure why this was because I wasn't even sure I could.
All in all I'm getting tired of the whole thing and about ready to just take the $1500 and run. _________________ Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
"If they asked him to use a vehicle they knew was faulty"
They did....a week after the accident while I was at work the same situation happened. They asked if I could use my vehical to deliver.
THE DOORS WERE FUSED SHUT!!! on the passenger side, as well as I did not know the full extent of the mechanical damage to the vehical. I was only driving it the 1 mile to work so I could get to work. _________________ Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
I was told by the companies insurance company that......insurance follows the driver. (Not the vehical.) So I would have been liable no matter what. Their insurance wouldn't cover me at all.
Okay... but don't let this conversation mislead you... insurance on your end would only need to apply if you were responsible for the accident. Everyone agrees, you were not. So insurance on your end is a moot point (if your policy did not provide liability coverage, your employers policy would).
Quote:
The Workmans comp company said, since I wasn't seriously injured that we were done talking. Then they sent a letter to the ladys insurance company saying they were 100% reponsible for the medical bills and wouldn't pay a cent.
I know a little (no everything) about WC coverage and I _highly_ doubt that this is correct. First, them providing coverage for your medical bills would not have anything to do with the extent of your injury or treatment and two, if they did not pay anything out there is no reason for them to send a letter to the other carrier. WC would need to address your medical bills if you filed a claim. Have you spoken to the WC adjuster directly? Ask that adjuster _exactly_ why they are not going to pay anything. Let us know what they told you. I think there is some confusion here.
Quote:
I had also heard from a couple of the store managers. That the reason for the "car driver" agreement was because they were afraid I was going to sue. Now I'm not sure why this was because I wasn't even sure I could.
Your correct. "Store managers" probably don't know a lot about insurance and legal liability. That is why there are insurance agents .
Quote:
All in all I'm getting tired of the whole thing and about ready to just take the $1500 and run.
Understood... it's up to you. But do I think you could at least get another $200 for simply offering to sign a release/settle for the new amount? Yup. The $1500 might be a very fair offer, I can't say. I'm not saying that the adjuster will move off of the $1500 but would it hurt to say, "okay, I appreciate the offers and tell you what... I'd be willing to consider this matter settled if you would be willing to increase your offer another $200. If not, I'll really need to explore other options". See what he says and if you still want to accept the $1500, do so.
).....If he was not compensated either in mileage or some way he certainly has a claim with them for that...my thought was (course too late now) that he would've had another option to look for payment as far as his vehicle's total..
) They did nothing wrong other than putting me behind the wheel..which is exactly what his employer did....I don't know T, course this is a fun off shoot and not at all what happened in this OP, but as we adjusters tend to do the ''well, what if'' 
