Insurance coverage for an accident while driving under the influence

Factual Questions
21

Ah, your reasons for confusion are legitimate then, yeah, no-fault states ran a huge gamut and Michigan was the most “true” no fault state at the time I was writing policies. But it’s far less so now by my last research, in part because it only worked reasonably well if everyone involved had their own coverage (IE a car, or a non-owner’s policy) and between incidents like the one you describe, and a nation-wide issue with non-insured drivers that made it increasingly insolvent.

An aside, I was sick of some people blaming immigrants for that problem, it was almost always “good normal folk” who were negligent, broke, or “I’m a great driver, why do I need to pay for insurance” types.

22

I just don’t know why it’s so expensive. I had to take collision off my car because I was paying so much it didn’t make sense.

23

I’ll summarize because we’re moving a bit far afield, but it all boils down to $$$.

Medical costs are skyrocketing, so payouts for BI (bodily injury) Medical Payments (or PIP in no-fault), and UM/UIM (see my earlier complaint about uninsured motorists) are higher every year.

Modern vehicles tend to be more pricey overall, and repair costs are also high between parts costs (see trade wars) and labor costs. Over 10 years ago, average repair labor was over $75/hour with negotiated rates, though local markets can adjust that.

And yeah, while ambulance chaser lawyers don’t help, it was the first two that were killing costs. Michigan was more expensive than many though due to the High no-fault coverage preventing most subrogation efforts.

I’ll leave out questionable insurance pricing as way beyond the scope of the thread, but they weren’t exactly innocent.

24

Thanks, that makes sense.

25

In the UK, the car owner’s insurance is liable for all third-party claims. If the driver is uninsured, circumstances will determine whether they must pay for damage to the car. Note that personal car insurance policies are restricted to named drivers, and only they are insured to drive that car.

26

As I understand, some provinces in Canada have “no-fault” insurance, but basically there is one government-run insurance company. Every car is insured, it goes with the license plate. (Used to be, when people swapped plates every year - now I guess the police can radio in plates to see if it is lapsed). So one company pays all auto claims. The person at fault may pay the deductible. It will not pay damages on the vehicle of a DUI driver. Rehab/physiotherapy treatment is also covered. Regular medical bills are of course, the separate universal health care, so not a lot of disputes about those. In the case of pedestrians or the mentioned cyclist, the auto insurance commission would pay what was needed - usually the physiotherapy service.

It’s debatable which is a better system. From what I’ve read, for one province it’s more expensive than private insurance, for another it’s less. But the rules are the same for everyone.

I knew a fellow who spent a short stint in Manitoba, which has this no-fault. His car was totaled, and he still had Ontario plates and insurance. When asked why he hadn’t changed, he said “If they gave me a contract longer than 6 months at a time, I’d have changed.” (He had 3 consecutive 6-month contracts) The reason he kept it was he said 3rd-party only insurance on his junker car was cheaper than the default mandatory insurance over there. So his junker car was written off, and he got nothing. But he saved a decent amount in insurance.

I once asked (years ago) why it cost so much to insure my old motorcycle which was probably worth less than the annual insurance. The agent said “doesn’t matter how old the bike is, if you hit someone they’re just as badly hurt.”

27

How do the lawyers contribute to the problem? They’re just trying to get compensation for their injured client and their damaged property.

28

Note that personal car insurance policies are restricted to named drivers, and only they are insured to drive that car.

How does this work with spouses or licensed kids driving the same car? Families with more than one car? Letting your sister use your car while she visits?

29

Can the insurance company pay what they have to pay then drop him? If so, is it then possible to get other insurance with that on your record?

30

You may be wooshing me, but just in case.

When I say “ambulance chasers” I’m speaking of a specific class of lawyers that advertise in a way to encourage extra damages so that they can make predatory claims to support their massive skim of a settlement. Note - I never said anything about the clients, most of which I’m sure do have some issues that weren’t resolved, their insurance didn’t resolve, or they lacked specific coverage for.

But it does contribute to the costs of claims, which in turn, increases premiums, which was what @Spice_Weasel was asking about. And note I also clearly stated that the insurance companies themselves and their pricing models weren’t innocent either.

My professional experiences likely do inform my opinions, so I can’t pretend to be entirely impartial.

Long Story about Claim with Ambulance Chaser Lawyer Making Things Worse

Sharing one case I did, I handled a claim, did the investigation and accepted 100% fault. The person our insured hit was uninsured, so it was harder to communicate, but I did explain that we were accepting responsibility for their car damage (and at this point about 3-4 weeks in, they reported no injury, no pain) and would pay out to the limit of coverage, but that would likely not fully cover their loss (more on that in a sec.).

Three days later, they lawyered up, and I was contacted by their new lawyer, was told to cease and desist contact their client (fair, and a norm), and that their client now also was in pain and wanted to consider other claims. So, I did the norm - sent the form letter acknowledgement, confirmed our acceptance of liability, and provided the lawyer a copy of the coverage.

I CC’d the BI team, since I primarily handled loss, contact, and physical damage claims.

And we heard nothing for three weeks. Then the client called ME and said the lawyer had declined to pursue the case, and I told them I couldn’t contact them until that lawyer had released the contract to us on the record.

Four WEEKS later, we finally got the fax from the attorney. So I called up the client and said I could refer a shop or send a local adjuster to inspect and cut a check in 72 hours. No injuries were claimed by the client, and they had the check in three days.

The problem was that my client only carried the state minimum of coverages for CA at the time. So no real dithering, the damages were clear, so we cut a check for $5k and were done. Apparently, to no one’s surprise, the lawyer wasn’t interested when they got the confirmation that as I told the victim, we accepted responsibility, but there wasn’t enough coverage, and yet by inserting himself they added roughly 10 weeks to the process, cost their “client” roughly 1/5 of their settlement in fees (this per the customer’s reporting of having to pay the lawyers minimum fees), and who was also responsible for “suggesting” that their client claim possible injuries (reading between the lines, it wasn’t quite over the line of fraud, just that the lawyer suggested they get several medical tests just to be ‘safe’ which didn’t end up happening).

So again, may be a woosh, and many injury cases may need a lawyer or medical advocate to make a good case, but there is absolutely a class of lawyers who insert themselves in the process just to pad their own pockets contributing to rising costs and to the detriment of everyone’s experience.

31

Ontario is no-fault, but private insurers. BC is government run.

32

Ah. I haven’t had to find out (fortunately)

33

Lawyers walk away with a very large fraction of the money in any case they touch. And yes, they absolutely encourage their clients to invent or exaggerate injuries.

34

Spouses are “named” and have to declare their history.

Families with multiple cars can have a single policy to cover them all, but for various reasons, that may not be the best idea.

Kids, the same, although there is an anomaly where if a young driver is the primary, and parents “named” the premiums are often lower. Cheating with this is called “fronting” and can invalidate the insurance.

Letting your sister, or someone else, drive the car is a bit of a no-no. Adding drivers can be costly. Some (but not commonly) policies allow other drivers if they also have insurance for their own car. The caveat is that the insurance makes them legal, but only covers third-party damage, so if she damages your car, they won’t pay out.

Note that cars driven by uninsured drivers are seized. The driver gets a hefty fine and points on their licence, and the car has to be recovered from the pound.

35

You just have to add the people you’re happy to drive it to the insurance policy as ‘named drivers’. You can get people temporarily added if it’s for a visit (often no cheaper than a full year), or for the whole year. For an older driver with a good driving history, the cost to add them can be pretty trivial -it can even bring the cost down to add them if the main driver is under age 25 and has only recently passed their test. Insurance for newly qualified young drivers can be eye wateringly high, so the insurance companies don’t want cheap loopholes allowing them to drive withing the insurance knowing about it.

As an example, I worked for a while with a guy who’d got caught drink driving in the first few years of having a car- which is taken really seriously here. He was banned from driving for at least a year, had to re-qualify (which is a loooong process here) plus a big fine. He’d only recently had the ban expire, passed his test and got the licence again. Iirc, the quotes he was getting were in the region of £6000 a year. Mine, in a similar car, is under £500/yr, for comparison. No way the insurance would want to cover me loaning him my car without them knowing…

Insurance used to give drivers aged over 25 default 3rd party cover for driving any car loaned to them- I still check I get that, because I do, rarely, borrow my Dad’s van. It’s becoming less common in the last few years though. Apparently if it doesn’t say it on the policy you can sometimes call and get it added- the person who told me that said it complicated the paperwork from the insurance side and so few drivers seemed to care that they’re now dropping it as a default.

It used to be possible to get insurance allowing you to loan your car to anyone with a driving licence- my Great Uncle insisted on getting it, though he rarely actually loaned his car out. I’m not sure if it got insanely expensive or straight up unavailable, but I remember him complaining that he could no longer get it about 15 years back.

For spouses, one potential problem is that families often wind up with a ‘main driver’, who’s the one who qualifies for cheaper insurance - my Mother, age 70, has never had car insurance in her own name, she was on her Dad’s insurance and since then my Dad’s insurance. This is a pretty common scenario for women who married young. If the main driver dies, or stops being able to drive, or the couple split, the partner who was just a ‘named driver’, not the policy holder- almost always the woman in hetero couples- may be treated as though they just passed their test and have no driving history for insurance purposes, so they have to pay a massive extra premium. Even if they’ve been doing half the driving for the last 40 years with no incidents.

36

Ah, so you insure drivers, where we (mostly) insure cars. I’m allowed to lend my car to anyone who doesn’t live me or drive it regularly, (who is legally allowed to drive) and they are covered. So when i was driving a friend home from a road trip, shortly after recovering from covid, and got tired, i pulled into a gas station, filled the tank, and said, can you please take over, I’m exhausted and didn’t feel safe driving". And he did. And it was completely legal, and a pretty normal thing for American drivers to do.

And an instance company can buy my driving history from the state. Doesn’t matter whether i own a car, or drive someone else’s.

Rental car insurance in the US only covers named drivers, if you want to share the driving, you have to tell them up front. And you have to name the drivers in your household. (I forget the rules is they have their own car that they usually drive. I think you need to name them, but they are cheap. If course, they need to pay for insurance on their car.)

37

Here is one literally chasing an ambulance.

Insurance lawyers? This is FQ so, it is extremely common for the defense lawyer to bill a bunch of hours first, and then settle the case after that is done. Nothing is learned or gained in that process. It’s just that Defense lawyers get paid by the hour, ambulance chasers do not.

Anyways, it’s lawyers in general being placed in an adversarial system that is the problem. Being paid to fight is by designed.

38

Doctors are supposed to place patient health ahead of their income. Lawyers are supposed to place justice (for all parties) ahead of their income.

Many do, some few don’t. The some few are much of the problem. Regardless of profession, some forget they’re supposed to be “professionals”. Which term means being selfless in the application of their skills to the benefit of society.

39

In the US, i don’t actually think lawyers are supposed to put justice above their income. That’s a professionalism requirement in the UK, i believe, but in the US i think they are supposed to put their client above all else. Maybe some lawyer will tell me I’m wrong, but I’m not expecting it.

(Doctors are supposed to place client health above all else.)

40

If anyone’s interested, commercial fleet insurance in the UK is totally different.

I have managed two fleets, one with a PLC and the other with the NHS. In both cases, we insured a total number of vehicles - cars, vans, and trucks. The underwriters looked at the fleet as a whole, and I sent them a quarterly report on the fleet mix, so that they had a record. They were not interested in the drivers or the individual vehicles, only the total at year-end. The premium depended almost entirely on the claims history. Of course, there was a relatively high excess (deductible) that we had to pay.

Larger fleets than mine are often self-insured. They do have a policy, but it could have a £million excess. Effectively, they settle all claims internally.