My sons car was totaled but not his fault. Does he have to notify his ins co?

[BibH]

On a $12,000 car. Ouch.



Yes.



Those expenses are compensable.



He needs to call the other driver's insurance company, report the claim, get a claim number and an adjuster who will give him instructions as to what to do.



Could go either way. He'll just have to go through the process.



No. There is no contractual obligation to represent your son in a claim against another insurance company. His agent might or might not be willing to advise him on the claim process but the other insurance company rep is not obligated to talk to anybody but the claimant or the claimant's attorney.

Is your son over 18?

Thanks for the info. Yes he's 25 and the car title is in his name and the insurance is in his name but both our names are on the insurance.It's been like that for the last 4 yrs. The reason why is because he gets my multi car and homeowners discount. MY QUESTION IS SHOULD HE EVEN CONTACT OUR INSURANCE COMPANY STATE FARM IF IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM AND THEY WON'T HELP US AGAINST THE OTHER COMPANY? Since my names on the policy maybe i should do all the talking and fight for him.

 

[adjusterjack]

MY QUESTION IS SHOULD HE EVEN CONTACT OUR INSURANCE COMPANY STATE FARM IF IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM AND THEY WON'T HELP US AGAINST THE OTHER COMPANY?

No need to yell. Here's what your policy says (or similar wording).
No harm in waiting a couple of days for the response from the other insurance company. If the response is positive and quick you can report it to your insurance company for information only and advise that the other company is taking care of it. Two or three days is still "promptly."

Since my names on the policy maybe i should do all the talking and fight for him.

His car, his accident, his claim, he's an adult, he will have to handle this himself. He might as well learn how as it isn't likely to be the last accident in his lifetime.

That your name is on his policy has nothing to do with the claim against the other insurance company. That claim rep has no obligation to talk to you.

 

[mplsmm]

I have often wondered about State Farm listing a parent that doesn't even live in the home on the child's insurance policy "to get all the discounts." I have a new client that had his married 35 year old son that owned his own home on his policy. Why on earth would anyone want to be liable for a grown child to save said child $50 a month? I advise my customers, if they are 18, move out and own the vehicle why be on the hook anymore?
Our policy language says you have to notify of any accident.
Plenty of times it turns out to not be as clear cut as you think. Their insurance could be lapsed, it could be state minimum, they could dispute anything and it could drag on forever.
Right now I have a customer that was traveling out of state and was a passenger in another car that got t boned. The General thinks the state law the car was registered in should prevail not the state the car was actually in so they are dragging their feet on her very serious injuries and the vehicle replacement of the other vehicle . Its been 6 months and we expect it to be much longer. These things can take ages. I hope you talk to him about having a liability only policy. If the other side doesn't have insurance, he will not be getting a replacement vehicle.

 

[adjusterjack]

The General thinks the state law the car was registered in should prevail not the state the car was actually in

That, of course, depends on the terms and conditions of the policy.

Check the General's policy Liability Section for something that looks like this:

OUT OF STATE COVERAGE
If an auto accident to which this policy applies occurs in any state or province other than the one in which your covered auto is principally garaged, we will interpret
your policy for that accident as follows:
A. If the state or province has:
1. A financial responsibility or similar law specifying limits of liability for
bodily injury or property damage higher than the limit shown in the Declarations, your policy will provide the higher specified limit.
2. A compulsory insurance or similar law requiring a nonresident to maintain insurance whenever the nonresident uses a vehicle in that state or province, your policy will provide at least the required minimum amounts and types of coverage.
B. No one will be entitled to duplicate payments for the same elements of loss.

 

[Allen Trent]

us and not him/her/they/em/per/ver/hir/zir/xem?

too soon, too soon

 

[mplsmm]

That, of course, depends on the terms and conditions of the policy.

Check the General's policy Liability Section for something that looks like this:

OUT OF STATE COVERAGE
If an auto accident to which this policy applies occurs in any state or province other than the one in which your covered auto is principally garaged, we will interpret
your policy for that accident as follows:
A. If the state or province has:
1. A financial responsibility or similar law specifying limits of liability for
bodily injury or property damage higher than the limit shown in the Declarations, your policy will provide the higher specified limit.
2. A compulsory insurance or similar law requiring a nonresident to maintain insurance whenever the nonresident uses a vehicle in that state or province, your policy will provide at least the required minimum amounts and types of coverage.
B. No one will be entitled to duplicate payments for the same elements of loss.

It's already being battled between legal teams of all 3 companies but she was only a passenger. She was in a vehicle covered by progressive, that vehicle was hit by a car covered by Geico. The issue is really that MN is a no fault state and everyone covers their own medical. The other state is not. Geico says they sticking to MN mandates so they aren't liable for the passengers medical although the accident was in another state. Progressive says they won't cover a passenger because geico should.. The passengers auto policy is picking up her medical because no one else will although there is no reason they should, they hope to get it back in arbitration. Hopefully that makes more sense this time.
So accident out of state. Passenger has MN auto policy with other carrier, driver has progressive MN, person at fault has out of state policy and accident happened out of state. MN no fault state with PIP, other state is not no fault.

 

[mplsmm]

It's already being battled between legal teams of all 3 companies but she was only a passenger. She was in a vehicle covered by progressive, that vehicle was hit by a car covered by Geico. The issue is really that MN is a no fault state and everyone covers their own medical. The other state is not. Geico says they sticking to MN mandates so they aren't liable for the passengers medical although the accident was in another state. Progressive says they won't cover a passenger because geico should.. The passengers auto policy is picking up her medical because no one else will although there is no reason they should, they hope to get it back in arbitration. Hopefully that makes more sense this time.
So accident out of state. Passenger has MN auto policy with other carrier, driver has progressive MN, person at fault has out of state policy and accident happened out of state. MN no fault state with PIP, other state is not no fault.

I will add passengers auto policy is also paying disability in addition to medical although she was not driving and was not in a no fault state. Her benefits are almost exhausted after months though and she is really getting the runaround.

 

[adjusterjack]

Her benefits are almost exhausted after months though and she is really getting the runaround.

Then it's time for her to get a lawyer and file suit against the at-fault driver.

Is there any dispute as to fault? Describe how the accident happened. And name the state where the accident happened.

Let's see if I have this straight.

The accident occurred in a tort state. The at-fault driver's insurance is GEICO, written in the tort state.

The driver of the victim car has a MN no-fault policy with Progressive.

The passenger of the victim car has her own MN no-fault policy. It's likely that her first-party coverage allows her to claim it regardless of where the accident occurred. MN allows subrogation of PIP claims so, assuming that there is no dispute about fault, GEICO is likely to end up reimbursing the PIP carrier anyway.

GEICO would also be liable for her pain and suffering since the accident occurred in a tort state which is what I am sure GEICO is attempting to avoid.

There are two PIP policies at play. Each policy pays a pro-rated share of the total amount of PIP paid out, subject to the PIP limits. See Other Insurance in the following (which might or might not be the current form):

https://www.northstarmutual.com/UserFiles/File/forms/policyforms/Current/PP 05 67 01 15.pdf

Once her own benefits are exhausted she should be looking to her driver's PIP coverage.

 

[mplsmm]

Our claims felt it should follow ND guidelines since that's where the accident occurred and where the Geico vehicle is registered. Its pretty ridiculous that no one paid anything. So since she is exhausted, she has given proof of the exhaustion to Geico and Progressive. Who knows what will happen now but as the adjuster told me, her getting a lawyer might affect our ability to recover what her auto policy has paid out. Its a good thing she had her own auto policy, if not, I think she would be out the money unless she got a lawyer right away.

 

[adjusterjack]

Our claims felt it should follow ND guidelines since that's where the accident occurred and where the Geico vehicle is registered.

That's correct. At least with respect to any liability claim filed against the GEICO policy.

Its pretty ridiculous that no one paid anything.

It's not ridiculous. GEICO's obligation is to it's own insured: To pay, defend, or settle as it sees fit on behalf of it's insured.

As long as there is some dispute about who pays what where GEICO is within its rights to delay until a court of law says who pays what where.

the adjuster told me, her getting a lawyer might affect our ability to recover what her auto policy has paid out.

What adjuster told you that? What's your position in all this?

And you haven't answered my questions about fault and accident details.