Auto Insurance Question

V

vkhosid

Cleared for Takeoff
Joined
Sep 15, 2014
Messages
1,474
Location
SFO
Display Name
Display name:
94V
Hey guys,

Quick question for you. I've only been in one car accident before, and in that particular situation both parties had insurance. The question arises from a collision I was involved at the beginning of February. The details are as follows:

After the accident, the police were called to take the report. The other driver and myself never directly exchanged info as this was handled by the cop. After I received a copy of the police report, I filed a claim with my insurance and the process began. Fast forward to last night, when I received a letter from the other persons insurance company stating that "Our investigation concluded that no coverage existed between XXXX Company and our insured for this particular accident." Now, the way its worded is a bit ambiguous. Does this say that they're denying my claim to cover my damages through her insurance? Or is that saying they're denying coverage completely?

This leads to more questions...should I treat this as an uninsured motorist? Or is it simply saying that they're are taking the stance that she's not at fault?

I tried to reach out to them to confirm, but they will not give me any info.

So, the question is this: Have you guys ever ran across something like that? Are any of you in the insurance biz that could clarify this? Anyone with any advice? I'm more curious than concerned at this point since my insurance is covering the damage for me. I just want to make sure my premium wont be hiked because of this incident.

Thanks guys!
 
Sounds like the other driver had "borrowed" someone's car but was not named on the policy, so the automobile owner's insurance company is denying the claim.

It's difficult to tell if it's uninsured motorist or not... yet. If the other driver is covered by a different policy, then your insurance company will find out and pursue that insurance company. If the other driver had no insurance, then it's uninsured motorist.

With your insurance company involved, it's unlikely the other vehicle's insurance company will provide any information. They will want to deal directly with your insurance company only.

I've run into something similar where an uninsured motorist provided false data. I handed everything over to my insurance company for them to pursue. As you stated, your insurance company is handling your repairs and will pursue the other driver. You likely will have to pay your deductible until your insurance company collects from the other driver, unless of course, you have uninsured motorist coverage. After my incident, I carry that on my policy now.
 
I'm not in the insurance business, but it sounds to me like your next step is to call your insurance agent if you have one, or the company if you purchased it direct.

I believe that uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage pays for bodily injury, not damage to your car. I could be wrong.

As to whether your rates go up, that depends on whether or not you are found at fault and your insurer's rating practices. Some insurers routinely give you a break for your first accident in X number of years, even if you're at fault. Others don't. Others may or may not, depending on the situation.

Rich
 
vkhosid said:
I received a letter from the other persons insurance company stating that "Our investigation concluded that no coverage existed between XXXX Company and our insured for this particular accident."
Click to expand...

The company is saying that there was not a valid policy in force for the other driver at the time of the accident. Most of the time it's because the other policy was lapsed (due to non-payment) at the time. But it could be for a number of other reasons, none of which matter to you. Your only concern is that the guy didn't have coverage.

Now, to the important part. You didn't say who was at-fault, which kind of leads me to believe that it was you. If so, it's no big deal since he wouldn't owe you for your injuries or damage to your car anyway. If you have collision coverage your company will pay for the damage to your vehicle regardless of fault, minus the deductible.

If the other guy was at fault, just because he didn't have insurance at the time doesn't let him off the hook. You can sue him to collect your damages. (and if you have collision coverage on your car your insurer will likely sue him anyway for their out-of-pocket expenses. It's called subrogation.)
 
I specifically left out details as to liability because my insurance company has not made a determination regarding liability yet. However, I maintain that the collision was caused by the other driver, and have submitted a statement to my insurance outlining why I think I am NOT at fault.

Knowing the details and how the incident unfolded, I'm assuming that my insurance will determine that I was NOT at fault for the collision. So, for the sake of offering advice, can we assume that the collision will be ruled either that I am NOT at fault (or worst case scenario, 50/50).
 
This is why I often don't bother with insurance.

The few times I've needed it, I would have been better off saving the money I spend on insurance and deductible I would have been better off without and paying for it out of pocket.
 
James331 said:
This is why I often don't bother with insurance.

The few times I've needed it, I would have been better off saving the money I spend on insurance and deductible I would have been better off without and paying for it out of pocket.
Click to expand...

In california, I believe there's an option to "Self-insure" or whatever its called. But I believe that you have to provide proof of a certain amount of financial liquidity...or something to that extent...An amount that's not trivial, i'm sure.
 
James331 said:
This is why I often don't bother with insurance.

The few times I've needed it, I would have been better off saving the money I spend on insurance and deductible I would have been better off without and paying for it out of pocket.
Click to expand...

You don't buy insurance for the small stuff. You buy it for the possibility of a catastrophe. ex. sliding on ice and hitting a pedestrian. accidents happen. I was working one a few weeks ago where a guy crested a hill on a blacktopped back road. Didn't expect two women to be jogging out there. Paved road, but the sand and grit didn't allow for traction. Skid marks show where he hit them both, killing one, a 34 YO mother of 10 YO twin boys. $1M on the auto policy and another $1M umbrella. We'll pay the policy limits and the family will still likely be wiped out.
 
Hypothetically speaking, lets say the driver of this vehicle is insured. However, her insurance doesn't cover her in any vehicle other than her own. In this instance, she was involved in this collision in a vehicle she was borrowing from someone else. Because of this, her insurance is denying coverage. Can it be then, that the insurance company (or registered owner) that is covering the vehicle she was driving will go after my insurance company to try and recoup losses?
 
RJM62 said:
I'm not in the insurance business, but it sounds to me like your next step is to call your insurance agent if you have one, or the company if you purchased it direct.

I believe that uninsured / underinsured motorist coverage pays for bodily injury, not damage to your car. I could be wrong.

As to whether your rates go up, that depends on whether or not you are found at fault and your insurer's rating practices. Some insurers routinely give you a break for your first accident in X number of years, even if you're at fault. Others don't. Others may or may not, depending on the situation.

Rich
Click to expand...

There is uninsured motorist property damage. If you owned a car without comprehensive and collision coverage, this is an option to make sure your insurance will take care of you in the event of a hit and run/accident with an uninsured. It's generally very inexpensive coverage even with very low deductibles.
 
vkhosid said:
In california, I believe there's an option to "Self-insure" or whatever its called. But I believe that you have to provide proof of a certain amount of financial liquidity...or something to that extent...An amount that's not trivial, i'm sure.
Click to expand...
Looks like in CA, it's $35k cash on deposit with the DMV, a self insurance cert (says to call for info), or a $35k surety bond of some kind.

Here in TX, it looks like for self insurance, you'd need to be a name on >25 vehicles. We have options for $55k cash deposit with either the State comptroller or County judge, and some kind of surety bond as well.

I'm kinda shocked that TX wants more money on file than CA, though.
 
vkhosid said:
In california, I believe there's an option to "Self-insure" or whatever its called. But I believe that you have to provide proof of a certain amount of financial liquidity...or something to that extent...An amount that's not trivial, i'm sure.
Click to expand...

Self-insurance is theoretically possible in New York, sort of, but very cumbersome and impractical. Very few companies and I doubt many (if any) individuals do it anymore. The application is seven pages long, requires disclosure of very detailed financial information, and doesn't guarantee approval. Even if approved, you still need excess liability coverage of $5 Million or more, so it's not even really self-insurance.

Back in the old days, one could simply post a surety bond and be done with it. Not any more. It's easier to run for office than to self-insure nowadays.

New York's car insurance rates are actually the tenth lowest in the nation (for reasons I can't quite understand, everything else tending to be very expensive), so few companies bother with self-insurance anymore. The last one I worked for that did it switched over to commercial insurance in the late 1990's.

I pay about $100.00 / month for full coverage with a $500.00 deductible, the maximum liability limits that USAA offers, and all the optional coverages. I probably could get it down to about $85.00 / month by reducing the liability limits to state minimums and paring down some of the optional coverages.

Rich
 
I've delt with something similar that was pushed over to uninsured to save the hassle.

I had a kid sideswipe my car in college that was denying he did anything after my friends and I found him. We found his headlight lense laying next to my car and took it to the police as evidence. We used the make and model info to track him down in the parking lots. Long story short my insurance company didn't want dive into the muck and switches the claim to uninsured, which ended up being better for me.

I will say the campus police had it out on the kid for a few months. It's nice having friends in the department...
 
RJM62 said:
I probably could get it down to about $85.00 / month by reducing the liability limits to state minimums and paring down some of the optional coverages.

Rich
Click to expand...

That's the thing a lot of people don't realize. Since the vast majority of claims fall below the state-required minimum, you can increase your coverage limits substantially for not much more.
 
Gerhardt said:
That's the thing a lot of people don't realize. Since the vast majority of claims fall below the state-required minimum, you can increase your coverage limits substantially for not much more.
Click to expand...

That's why I don't bother reducing any of them. I'd be giving up an awful lot of coverage for a pretty trivial amount of money. Some of the optional coverages also partially overlap other coverage I have, but the cost comes out to literally pennies a month for most of them.

The small differences in price are also why I deal with a good company. The difference in premiums is trivial compared to the hell that a bad insurer can put you through when you actually need them. I learned that lesson the hard way. I'll never again shop by price for car insurance. I'll probably stay with USAA forever, but if I ever do switch, it will be only after doing more research than I did for my last degree, starting with a frank discussion with an independent agent who understands that I'm not shopping primarily based on price.

Independent agents are great, but I think the very best sources of information about car insurers are local collision shops. I found the consistency of opinion among local collision shop owners in that area to be nothing short of remarkable. USAA, Amica Mutual, and Erie, for example, all got glowing reviews. Geico and Progressive, at the other extreme, made the body shop guys cuss and spit on the ground, usually accompanied by colorful language suggesting maternal incest on the insurers' parts. I must have talked to a dozen body shops in a 30-mile radius of Sparrow Fart, and they all gave the same answers.

If anyone knows which insurers are good and which ones suck, it's those guys, so I take their opinions as gospel. I suspect that this is kind of a regional thing, however, so I always advise people to ask their local collision guys what they think before choosing an insurer. Those guys deal with these outfits every day. They know the real deal.

Rich
 
vkhosid said:
Hypothetically speaking, lets say the driver of this vehicle is insured. However, her insurance doesn't cover her in any vehicle other than her own. In this instance, she was involved in this collision in a vehicle she was borrowing from someone else. Because of this, her insurance is denying coverage. Can it be then, that the insurance company (or registered owner) that is covering the vehicle she was driving will go after my insurance company to try and recoup losses?
Click to expand...

This can vary from state to state, and I am not licensed to practice in your state, and I haven't read the insurance policies. So, I can give you no formal opinions here.

If the driver has her own personal coverage, its going to provide liability coverage for her borrowing someone else's car. Also, the insurance policy for the owner of the vehicle is going to cover permissive users. So, if she didn't steal the car, she's probably covered if the owner had insurance in effect.

You have a letter saying that an insurer has denied coverage. That opens the door for you to make your uninsured motorist claim against your own carrier. Whether that covers property damage or not, and if so, the limits of such coverage, is going to be governed by the terms of your policy, subject to any state minimum requirements.
 
Last edited:
vkhosid said:
Can it be then, that the insurance company (or registered owner) that is covering the vehicle she was driving will go after my insurance company to try and recoup losses?
Click to expand...
Well, after you, but yes, if there is such a carrier it could pursue subrogation against you, or the owner could sue you.
 
James331 said:
This is why I often don't bother with insurance.

The few times I've needed it, I would have been better off saving the money I spend on insurance and deductible I would have been better off without and paying for it out of pocket.
Click to expand...

I'm totally with you with that position re insurance. I hate the damn racket that forces us to invest in disasters. It's a deal whereby the only time we get anything for our money is causing or allowing ourselves to be victim of misfortune. I'm no psychologist but seems to me this actually, subconsciously, encourages us to eventually do something that will allow us to get back something of what we've put in over the years. Also encourages a complacent attitude in operation of vehicles. Instead of paying complete attention to driving and maintaining total situational awareness, being "in good hands" of Allstate or whichever company we pick suggests we turn the stereo up and yak or netsurf on the cellphone, etc. - and so what if we run into somebody or, because we weren't alert enough, allowed somebody else to run into us. I hate insurance. In my way of thinking keeping that money we are forced to put out in premiums would have us able to cover our own costs for any damage that occurs - which is exactly what I do anyway rather than making a claim and getting a raised insurance rate. Except I can't remember having any accidents in this country. I did run a Mazda 323 off the side of a mountain in Brenton-on-Sea in South Africa. I just gave it to the tow company and bought another car. Screw insurance. I reluctantly get just what's needed to keep a mortgage or keep vehicles registered and resent every penny I spend on it.
 
My wife s a State Farm agent. Do not forget that when you pay for insurance you also pay for representation. You should be able to call your agent, explain your side and they should handle the rest. If your agent is not willing to go to bat for you then find one that will.
 
Gerhardt said:
That's the thing a lot of people don't realize. Since the vast majority of claims fall below the state-required minimum, you can increase your coverage limits substantially for not much more.
Click to expand...

I got my USAA auto policy renewal notice over the weekend, so I reviewed the policy as I usually do. I noticed that I didn't have three optional coverages: OBEL ($25,000), Additional PIP ($100,000), and Additional Medical Payments ($100,000).

I'd actually thought that I had them because I tend to max out coverage that protects people (as opposed to machines), but I guess I overlooked them. In any case, I added them on on Saturday. The difference in cost comes out to $15.98 / year.

Rich
 
Luvrv8 said:
Do not forget that when you pay for insurance you also pay for representation. You should be able to call your agent, explain your side and they should handle the rest. If your agent is not willing to go to bat for you then find one that will.
Click to expand...

This is where people get screwed with cut rate insurance...even if it is not your fault. I have had CSAA since I was 16 years old...probably could get a cheaper rate online somewhere, but any time I have EVER had an issue...sometimes my fault, other not...including a lawsuit once they took care of EVERYTHING without me having to loose a wink of sleep over it.

In this day and age you need to be sure that you have someone that has your back...and not just your payments.
 
Shawn said:
This is where people get screwed with cut rate insurance...even if it is not your fault. I have had CSAA since I was 16 years old...probably could get a cheaper rate online somewhere, but any time I have EVER had an issue...sometimes my fault, other not...including a lawsuit once they took care of EVERYTHING without me having to loose a wink of sleep over it.

In this day and age you need to be sure that you have someone that has your back...and not just your payments.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree in general, but USAA has impressed me as being an exception. For one thing, all the body shop guys love them and say they're one of the best companies to deal with. They also called me right after Sandy to check whether I'd had suffered any losses. They even had me walk around the place looking for missing shutters and the like. I was pretty impressed.

Amica Mutual is another direct-sale company that I've never heard anything bad about. My brother was insured by them and had an accident that resulted in a huge injury claim, and the injured party was so impressed that she switched over to Amica because her own company was giving her the runaround.

But in general, I agree that a good agent is priceless, especially for younger drivers.

Rich
 
I 2nd USAA. I've had them for home & auto for more than 30 years. When I've had problems, they just handle it. And they are knowledgeable when you call with questions. And (shh!) they don't exclude GA from their general liability coverage on your homeowners. (At least they didn't last year when I called about it.)

John
 
A lot of this is state depended. In MD(coverage depends on fault and 1% fault shares 50% responsibility) uninsured motorist policy is required and it's the vehicle that is insured. So, unless the driver is specifically excluded from policy, if the vehicle is insured, it and whatever it hits are covered.

In some states coverage is different and you cover your own damages only regardless of fault.
 
Sorry to bring up a semi-old thread, but had a follow-up question. Since our last installment, everything has pretty much been settled. Insurance ruled in my favor, and found the other party 100% at fault. Since she had no insurance at the time, my uninsured/under-insured policy kicks in. With that policy, they are reimbursing me for the missed days at work, the out-of-pocket medical costs, and a third category called "General Damages". To my understanding its the "pain and suffering" portion of the settlement.

The question is this (and I know its very generalized): what's a fair amount for this "general damages" category? I know, its a very subjective thing, but I don't want to get less than what I am entitled to, based on the collision. Is there a general baseline of values? Do I just roll a die and add a multiplier? Do any of you have any experience with this in the past? While i'm not expecting to win the lotto, I also don't want to be taken advantage of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top