by moy2133221 » Tue Feb 12, 2008 07:01 pm
I am currently a Cal State Student, also I just turned 18. I was in an uninsured accident on my way to school. I was driving on the street when a car went in front of me then moved quickly next thing I know I hit an F-250 on the side. The truck wasentering the center divider. The car I was driving was insured but for my mother and not me. I went to the hospital and now all the bills are coming. I was put down as the accident was my fault.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 08:06 pm Post Subject:
This can get tricky as it depends on the state. But usually your son would be considered an "insured" (policy definition) under your policy and as such, obtain liability coverage from your policy. If the state holds the driver responsible and not the owner, then usually liability coverage would come from your son's policy.
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 08:08 pm Post Subject:
The state is Kentucy.Do you know what that means ?
Posted: Fri Feb 15, 2008 09:09 pm Post Subject:
I appreciate the clarification. When I signed up for my car insurance (Geico) I was asked if I wanted to add a rider to cover other people who drove my car.
I'm a sucker for up selling because I'm a Scorpio, and thus, emotional by nature so I added the protection. The car been paid off for a while so my coverage has changed, but I do find the auto and homeowners insurance world fascinating.
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 01:04 am Post Subject:
It is better to be protected than to find out too late after an uninsured accident salpro that your vehicle will not be covered if some one else is driving it.
I would assume if the mother lets the kid drive the car, they should be covered right? even if they did not live at home? unless like you state that they are specifically excluded. But if they were excluded, why would you let them drive your car.
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 01:18 am Post Subject:
Kentucky has some quirky insurance laws, especially regarding their health insurance products. I don't know much about their auto policies. Maybe I should since, they're about a half hour away. Now...that's a scary thought.
I wonder if the ghost of Adolph Rupp will read this...And Tubby Smith???
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 01:36 am Post Subject:
I would assume if the mother lets the kid drive the car, they should be covered right? even if they did not live at home? unless like you state that they are specifically excluded. But if they were excluded, why would you let them drive your car.
Good point, I wouldn't let my children drive my car if they weren't insured. My parents recommended I get my own insurance and I bought my first car with my own money. Full coverage for my car was about 2/3 of my weekly paycheck at the time when I was earning $5 or so p/hour,. Opted for liability only.
2-3 months later I wrecked my car and had $3000 in debt to pay off when I was 17. I've had full coverage ever since.
There is nothing wrong with being ignorant about a subject. It's only stupid when you repeat the same mistake more than once!
Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2008 11:31 am Post Subject:
tcope is of course correct all states are different...in mine, if you excluded a party...and they get in an accident...you're done....that is why it is so vitally important to know the laws of your own state.
hummingbird you should be fine, call your agent and double check, yours kind of worries me a little since your boys new policy called for exclusions for all licensed household members...generally in my area anyway...exclusions are taken very seriously and not an automatic offer or conditon of issuance...
in most states ins stays with the car, meaning your son should be covered just fine under your policy, and your policy would be the one taking care of an accident he had in IT . so many times people don't understand this, and WANT or try to INSIST it be covered under the 'bad' drivers policy...don't work that way....
Clearly we would all be in a better position to understand and assist the op with additional information re: basis of the denial.
Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 04:10 am Post Subject:
You would not, or I would not anyway. I was just trying to figure out if everyon living in my house unless they were excluded were covered to drive my car.
Posted: Sun Feb 17, 2008 10:41 am Post Subject:
yep should be as an occasional driver
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 04:41 am Post Subject:
The mother is the owner and has the insurance policy. The owner could be held liable for the accident (as the owner). I see no reason why the owners policy would not protect the owner by paying the claim (again, to protect the owner).
Bingo! Thats where I would start and go from there. Try your hardest not to let them sell the account to a collection agency. That could put you in a whole other hoot.
Add your comment