If it was determined that the condominium did not bear any blame, then you are the one who would be responsible.
If two cars crash and neither driver has insurance, the police officer arriving on the scene will of course both issue you tickets for no insurance, and your license can be suspended. The officer will also determine who was at fault, generally the faulty party is responsible for damages. Otherwise you are both on your own for being negligent for not having insurance at the time of the accident.
The at fault party is still liable to pay the damages. Added: Both parties will probably be cited for driving without insurance as well.
Is the parking space a rental parking space, or is it the parking space for your rental apartment/home? In the case of the former, you have the right to ask your landlord for a different parking space, especially if you're the one paying its rental. In the case of the latter, unless that parking space is assigned to you -- that which you may ask to change -- then you need to park somewhere else. But in neither case is the landlord responsible for any damages that occur to your vehicle. Your car insurance or renters insurance should take care of that problem, save any deductibles
I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure neither party is liable. Think about it, neither of you had insurance, and neither called the police(coincidence? I think not.) hang it up, it's not gonna happen. No, without an official investigation, there is nobody to determine fault. You may THINK the other person is at fault, but unless he/she is willing to voluntarily pay for your damages, you're just out of luck.
Insurance stays with the car. So if the vehicle is insured (subject to any policy exclusions) and your 'permissive driver' were at fault then your policy will be primary on all damages. You both however are 'legally' responsible. If you are saying that neither the vehicle nor the driver had insurance. Then you both have a problem, and more than likely the injured party (or their insurance) will come to both of you for reimbursement.
It doesn't. Neither Homeowners insurance nor Renters insurance provides coverage for damages incidental to or resulting from from our election of pet ownership.
It should be specified in the final decree. If it isn't , neither one of you had a very alert lawyer.You will have to go back to court.
If neither vehicle was insured you will have to sue the other party in order to collect any damages. Drunk driving is a contributing factor but really whichever party is at fault for any reason will be liable to the other party. The bad news is that if the person did not have insurance the probably don't have assets to pay the damages. This is why you need insurance and uninsured motorists coverage.
Yes, All claims and accidents whether at fault or not at fault are required to be disclosed when applying for an auto insurance policy. Failure to do so can result in cancellation of your policy due to non-disclosure.
You are fully responsible for any loss or damage to a rental car. If you do not have insurance to cover this or have not purchased insurance from the car rental company, they will go after you for the full cost of the rental vehicle.
Generally no, barring some negligence or collusion, with the crminal, we are not responsible for acts of others, but there may be coverage for damages to the property under the homeowners insurance policy. The criminal who committed the crime would be the party responsible for their own acts. If you are the homeowner, and your property was damaged in the crime, then you will most likely have coverage for your losses under the property portion of your homeowners insurance policy. The liability portion of your home insurance would offer coverage for legal defense costs as well as any award for accidental damages or injuries for which the property owner (named insured) is found legally liable. Criminal acts of the insured is always excluded from coverage. Imagine this scenario, You have guests over for the week in your home. A Robber breaks into your house (your property) while you are at work, This robber then shoots and kills one guest in your home and assaults another guest. Do you think you, as the homeowner, should be held liable or responsible for that acts of a guy who illegally broke into your home and beat and murdered your guests simply because you own the property? Barring some negligence or facilitation of the crime, of course not. Here's another scenario, Someone carjacks you at gun point, they steal your car (your property), then use your car to rob a bank, As the carjacker/bank robber/murderer is hurriedly leaving the bank in your vehicle, they run over and kill two people and seriously injure three others. Should you, as the vehicle owner, be held responsible for 2 deaths, a bank robbery and injury to 3 people simply because it was your property that was used to do all this? Of course not. Barring negligence issues, neither you nor your Auto Insurance carrier would be liable or responsible for the acts of the thief who stole your car.
Neither. A rock hitting you're car is a minor damage and isn't handled by insurance companies. If a grown person does it you could file vandalism and demand the money for repairs. If it is a minor, 4-12, the damage stays and you really can't do much about it.