Anybody involved in an accident. Damages are covered regardless of fault.
Any accident is covered, but keep in mind you're only covered for the amount of coverage you bought, and that if you are at fault, your rates will go up (and sometimes even if you're not at fault).
no one is at fault it was an accident/ not enough information to determine if it was human error or car error
Actually, this will be covered by your insurance co.
Florida's no fault car insurance pertains to medical payments. The insurance states that the insurance company will pay for your bodily injury claims regardless of who was at fault for the accident. Damage done to property (i.e. the car) would still be covered by the at fault party. The Florida no fault car insurance is a benefit because one does not have to worry about not having their medical needs covered because the accident was the fault of the other party and they do not have sufficient insurance.
Your friend is. If she is over 25 she is normally covered. Because you claim on youe insurance, technically it will be an at fault accident and your premium may go up. You should talk to your insurer.
The person who causes the accident is at fault
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
Yes, If the accident was your fault, then it is your fault. Whether or not they have insurance has nothing to do with who's at fault, or who actually caused the accident.
The conflict of interest is at a no fault. The sentence should read "We had no fault for the car accident".
Yes, but proof will be necessary - determining fault. Some insurers like to mess with your head and question the "fault" and deny coverage. Get it in writing - possibly by the at-fault driver or YOUR insurance company. Here in Canada, even if you only have PLPD, if the accident is not your fault you are covered for repair, minus the deductible.
That depends on the text of your insurance policy. Whatever it says in it, is what you're covered for.
It is really based on whether the accident was at fault or not at fault. If it was not at fault, it usually will not increase.
Little Gap Covered Bridge was created in 1860.
yes,because i might be covered with the third party
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.
No. If you had an accident with your husbands car and you were at fault with only PLPD insurance, the damages to your vehicle would not be covered.
No, if their license was suspended they should not be driving, if they are involved in an accident and are at fault the other person can go after you since it is your car and then you are liable.
Then you're considered to be at fault, the logic being that you shouldn't have been there to get into an accident.
The word fault means responsible for an accident or misfortune.
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.
Fred was covered with an assortment of adhesive tape after the accident.
the cars fault-obviously
no one should be blamed. it is accident, and an accident is an accident.
If the police came out and made a report of it then it will be on your driving record. It will be a not-at-fault accident but it will still be on your driving record. If the police did not come out but your insurance knows about it then it will be on your CLUE report and be a not-at-fault accident.