answersLogoWhite

Top Answer
User Avatar
Wiki User
Answered 2014-03-04 09:12:50

Some do. I work for an insurance company and many will take ownership of the accident.

001
๐Ÿ™
0
๐Ÿคจ
0
๐Ÿ˜ฎ
0
๐Ÿ˜‚
0
User Avatar

Your Answer

Related Questions


If there is no other vehicle involved in the accident, then the only person who can be at fault is the underage driver.


No, but if involved in an accident, even when not at fault, the drunk driver would still be guilty of, and could be charged with, DUI.


I was recently involved in a car accident in which the driver of the other car is legally at fault. Is the other party's insurance still liable for damages involved if the at fault driver is: 1. not the owner of the car, 2. not the insurer of the car, 3. does not have a license. Thanks!


If you are involved in an automobile accident caused by another driver, and that driver carries no insurance, your no-fault clause is designed to protect your financial interests.


You can automatically be at fault in an auto accident if you are the only driver involved; you were the driver who was not obeying the speed limit; if you were the driver who was not using safe driving rules; if you were breaking a law; if you were impaired. The most common cause for automatically being at fault is driving too close to the car ahead of you for the speed you are going and driving over the speed limit. None of these conditions are 100% automatically your fault but very close to that, especially if others involved in the accident were not doing any of the above.


The liability, or fault-factor in an accident has nothing to do with whether or not a driver was licensed. The liability in an accident at an uncontrolled intersection can be shared. Several factors go into a case like that & would need to be fully investigated to determine.


He may be at fault for not having insurance. He may or may not be at fault for the accident. Whether or not a driver carries insurance is a separate issue than the one concerning who is at fault in an accident. Do not confuse them or let them overlap. A good, objective assessor won't.


They both are. The logic being that the unlicensed driver shouldn't have been there in the first place, and would not have been involved in the accident if they'd been in compliance with the law.


If he was at fault, regardless of whether he was pulling a camper or not, he would be responsible. Pulling a camper doesnt make you responsible for an accident if that was the only thing you did wrong. If someone rear-ended him, its their fault, if he rear ended someone or ran a red light, then yes, its his fault.



Who is at fault has to do with the accident itself not the insurance coverage. A police report of the accident and looking at the proximate cause of the accident help determine fault.


If I understand your question you are in an accident not your fault and it was settled, but the insurance was through a different company than the one you had ? I think they can hike the rates.


No. No fault means exactly that. The driver not responsible for the accident cannot be held liable for injuries to any passengers in the at fault vehicle.


If the other vehicle was parked, there was no other driver to have license, insurance or registration. The driver who hit the parked vehicle is at fault and is liable for all damages to the parked vehicle.


The fact driver B left the scene does not change that driver A is at fault (there are exceptions to driver A being at fault)Additional: While Driver A may have been the striking vehicle, Driver B MAY be at fault for "Changing Lanes Without Caution." Regardless of the circumstances of the collision itself, Driver B can be charged with "Leaving the Scene of an Accident."


It does not matter to an insurance company that the other driver had a suspended license. Liability is determined by the factors of the accident and the evidence put forth. The fact that the other driver had no license does not affect liability or the handling of the claim.


if you have collision coverage file under that then your company will subrogate the uninsured driver...if no collision coverage you can file a state report, and/or small claims action.....


Yes, the driver who was at fault is responsible for the bodily injury for anyone who has been hurt in the accident. The percentage of payment that has to be made would depend upon the percentage of fault for the accident, the prevaling norms of the state or province where the accident ocurred.


Anybody involved in an accident. Damages are covered regardless of fault.


Not really sure actually. In the eye of the law the accident will most likely be considered your fault.


As long as your teenager was properly insured and he was not involved in the commission of a crime at the time of the accident, nothing should happen to your teenagers driver license.


You get to, accident would not have happened if you werent on the road!


Unable to answer - too little is known about the circumstances of the accident. Was the driver of the car you were in at fault? Was the driver of the other car at fault? Submit your medical claims to the appropriate insurance company and wait to be contacted for an offer.


Usually if an accident is determined not to be the insured's fault, then their insurance rates will not rise as the insurance company did not lose any money from covering the driver involved in the accident. If the accident is determined as being inconclusive, the rates may rise some, to adjust for the amount of money the insurance company lost in the accident.


a judge in an American court makes the decision as to who is at fault for an auto accident. some states have "no fault" meaning in an accident all parties involved are given a percentage of the accident's fault



Copyright ยฉ 2021 Multiply Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site can not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with prior written permission of Multiply.