Well in 2 different states that I have lived and worked in the insurance follows the vehicle not the person. If someone is letting you borrow there vehicle then they are accepting responsibility for your actions, therefore the accident would be covered on there policy. Of course I would check with state laws to make sure.
The owner of the car is liable for the accident itself and the damage. However, the insurance company might have to pay for it, depending on the owners insurance cover.
The driver's insurance would then be considered "secondary," meaning if the owner of the auto didn't have insurance, then if the person driving the car had insurance, they would be liable.
Depending on the situation and the location in which the accident happened, both the driver and the owner of the boat can be legally liable for damages caused. That's why it's always important to have boat insurance, and why it's equally important to be careful who you allow to drive your boat. United Marine Underwriters provides boat insurance nationwide and has a comprehensive boat insurance guide that can answer a lot of other questions about coverage and miscellaneous details.
No you are not liable as your daughter is the owner and named insured
Who is the owner of the car your adult daughter was driving, you or her? If you, you can both be liable. Her as the driver, and you as the owner of the vehicle
the owner of the vehicle is always responceable in this situation..
The owner of the truck is liable for all damages and injuries as a result of an accident if found at fault. Normally these would be paid by the insurance company if there was an existing policy. Insurance policies are far cheaper than paying these expenses out of pocket.
It would depend on whose fault it was.
Yes, he is liable if the person driving has a fatal accident. His insurance allows him to cover people that drive his car with his permission. If that person wrecks his car and dies, the insurance would pay the funeral expenses and give the actual cash value for the car minus the deductible.
Probably the owner of the car. The car owner was traveling with it, and it got in the accident. now, if the owner was in the car, probably the owner of the horse would be responsible.
The insurance company is not going to force anyone to pay for damages to a car. The person that was driving the car and or the owner of that car that caused the accident is liable for the damages to the other vehicles involved in the accident. If there is insurance coverage for that damage then the insurance company will pay. However if the driver of the at fault vehicle is excluded from the insurance policy then the insurance company may be relieved from it's responsibility to pay on behalf of the owner of the vehicle.
Depends on why the accident happened and where. If the owner created a risk, then the landlord would be liable. If the tenant created the risk or failed to notify the owner of the risk, then the tenant may be liable, unless the accident happened outside of the area rented to the tenant (e.g., a common hallway in an apartment building would be the responsibility of the owner).
The owner of the vehicle please the people on the insurance policy are liable.
The registered owner is only required to furnish liability insurance. If the owner does not have sufficient coverage (liability, comprehensive or collision), then the driver's policy would invoke as secondary coverage. It's not nice to borrow someones vehicle, wreck it and then claim ""not my responsibility". after all, you did borrow the vehicle.
Yes, The owner of a vehicle is just as liable for an accident as the driver. Both the driver and the Vehicle owner are both jointly and severally liable for the cost of an at fault accident.Since you say the title is in the parents name, Then the Parents are in fact the legal owner of the vehicle as far as the state is concerned.The at fault driver is liable because they caused the accident, The Registered Owner is liable because the owner has a responsibility to ensure that all permissive use drivers have the appropriate insurance coverage before allowing them to operate the vehicle.Yes, If your daughter is still a minor, the legal guardian (usually the parents) can be sued under parental liability statutes even if the vehicle is not owned by the parents.
generally speaking in California your former boyfriend would be primarily liable in the event of an accident, however if it was some kinda quadriplegic awful thing occured and you had knowledge that he was an unsafe driver, theoretically you would be liable under a negligent entrustment theory.
Both the permissive use driver and the vehicle owner(s) are financially liable jointly and severally for all damages and injuries sustained in an "at fault" accident. Both can be sued. If you were driving and at fault. Then you are the person most directly responsible for causing the accident and you are financially liable. If the owner gave you permission to drive the vehicle, although he's not at fault, he is also financially liable because it's his car and he's the one who allowed you to drive the car. If you are not a covered driver under the terms and definitions of the owners policy then the insurance company will not pay for the accident. We should never borrow or loan out a vehicle without first verifying the driver will be covered under the policy.
The fault lies with the vehicle that cause the accident. When someone borrows a car, the car owner can be liable because the allowed someone to drive the vehicle. Often this type of accident has to be sorted out in court.
Generally No. If you have already sued the Home Insurance Company, then you have already sued by default the Homeowner. You can not have sued one without already having sued the other. If a property owner is liable to you for an accidental injury, The home owner may have insurance to cover those liabilities. The insurance company would not be the cause of an accident. If you sue an insured homeowner, their insurance company is only enjoined in the suit by virtue of the coverage provided to their insured home owner who has been sued. The homeowners insurance company may cover the cost of defense of the suit filed against the insured homeowner and may pay awards or judgments up to the limits of the homeowners insurance policy on behalf of that insured homeowner. Bear in mind that the Insurance Company is not liable for an accident, The insurance company may be liable for damages and awards based on assertions and finding of liability on the part of the insured homeowner. If your suit failed (or you Lost the suit), Then that means the homeowner was found not liable for your injuries. If you have accepted a settlement from the insurance company, that settlement will have settled your claims against the homeowner.
Well this depends on a lot of factors. For one if he is under 18 yes, you are liable. He is a minor. 18 or older no, hes an adult. Now, if he is 18 or older and you are on the title, then yes you can be liable. Technically they can go after anyone on the title, even if you weren't driving. Mark Owner of Denvers Insurance
AnswerWho was at fault in the collision? Why were you driving a vehicle that was not insured. Surely the drivers license test in your state asked you specific questions about insurance and you had to know that driving while uninsured is illegal. If you were at fault you are PERSONALLY responsible for the car and the damage that you caused. While the victim may go after both you AND the owner of the vehicle, legally you are responsible.In the UK if the accident was your fault you will be liable, but if you were driving the vehicle with the knowledge of the owner - the owner too is liable and in turn his insurer will indemnify a claim. UK and European law tries to track back to a motor insurance company so that a innocent victim receives the correct amount of compensation. Driving without insurance is a criminal offence, but if the accident was not your fault you should not be liable for injury and damage to another's vehicle. To establish fault in a car accident see the related link.
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!
Liability insuranceIn the Unites States, a landowner can sometimes be held liable for certain occurrences on the owned land. A Landowner is typically NOT held liable for the actions of tenants. This is what Renters Insurance is for. A Tenant can purchase property and liability insurance on a tenants policy. A property owner also is Typically NOT liable for the actions of criminals or others that may have entered your property illegally.So while its a good idea to maintain some type of Liability Insurance for Vacant Land to cover some occurrences where the owner might be liable. One should not presume that the property owner is liable for anything and everything that might occur on the property.
No, you can only be liable for the loan. If the car was totaled and did not have insurance then you can be held responsible for the balance on the loan. Any accident or damages that occurred would be the responsibility of the driver/owner of the vehicle. All your signature did was say that you will pay the loan if the borrower fails to do so.
A parent is liable of any damages their children do. The car owner is not liable for any damages caused if the vehicle was stolen.