My adult daughter got into a car accident and received a traffic ticket.
She was found not guilty of the violation. (failure to yield the right away. She was able to show that the other driver entered the intersection on a red light, not yellow like the police had believed).
She found out her insurance company already paid the claim to the other driver. And they don’t seem very interested in the fact that she was not convicted.
So now what? Should she sue the other driver for damages? Will her insurance still raise her rates?
Legal liability has a different standard than criminal liability. (Just ask OJ Simpson. 
)
The insurance company might also be doing a cost/benefit analysis. If settling a $5,000 claim saves them $10,000 in attorney costs, that’s a win for the insurance company. And since an insurance company’s motivation to increase premiums is indirectly linked to the costs of dealing with accidents, it’s probably even a win for your daughter.
As for whether her rates go up, it will depend on the company and the terms of her policy, but as I understand it, the increase in rates is not just based on fault, but on risk classifications. That’s why rates tend to go up when your credit rating goes down… technically, credit rating has nothing to do with driving ability, but there is a statistical correlation between bad credit and higher losses to the insurance company.
True enough. But what might happen if she sues him for damages (her car was older and had no collision on it). Will they use the fact that her insurance paid him as a defense, even though she can show he went through a red light?
I doubt the fact that a third party (her insurer) paid the other driver out would even be admissible evidence.