Seller's car had no insurance

[deckscrew]

I should try to be clearer: The insurance company of the car that I backed into is demanding payment. At the time of the accident I had no car and did not have any insurance. This car purchase was my first car. The seller told me he had insurance and I offered to pay the deductible, which was added to price of the car. Obviously he lied to me and took an additional $250

My license was current and I was working after school doing deliveries. The company provided me with a car, and did not require me to have any type of insurance.

 

[moburkes]

Justa

Some insurance companies allow 30 days when replacing a vehicle on the policy with another vehicle with the exact same coverages. So, if you're simply ADDING a vehicle, that 30 days goes out the window. If you're replacing a vehicle, but the current vehicle has liability only and the new vehicle has full coverage, that 30 days goes out the window. Many companies only allow 7 days. A few don't allow a grace period at all.

Please leave the insurance questions to the insurance professionals.

 

[Ozark_Sophist]

Are you just assuming the previous owner had no insurance?

 

[alnorth]

Are you just assuming the previous owner had no insurance?

We dont have to, the OP said the seller had no insurance

 

[moburkes]

We dont have to, the OP said the seller had no insurance

I think he's asking the OP that question, not us. He wants to know how the OP is SURE that the seller had no insurance.

 

[las365]

I think the bottom line is going to be that the OP is the one who backed into the car, so he is responsible for the damage. Of course, if the seller did have insurance, a claim should have been filed and it should have been covered since he had the seller's permission to drive the car.

He could sue the seller for the $250 obtained for the deductible under false pretenses (if the SOL has not run) and in the course of that suit, send discovery to find out what the seller's insurance history was on the car. It is likely that the insurance carrier of the owner of the damaged car has already done that research anyway - he could probably obtain that evidence from them. What addtional damages other than the $250, if any, might he claim against the seller?

 

[JustAPal00]

Justa

Some insurance companies allow 30 days when replacing a vehicle on the policy with another vehicle with the exact same coverages. So, if you're simply ADDING a vehicle, that 30 days goes out the window. If you're replacing a vehicle, but the current vehicle has liability only and the new vehicle has full coverage, that 30 days goes out the window. Many companies only allow 7 days. A few don't allow a grace period at all.

Please leave the insurance questions to the insurance professionals.

We're still waiting for you insurance professionals to come up with an intelligent answer!

 

[Zigner]

We're still waiting for you insurance professionals to come up with an intelligent answer!

Answer to what? Whether our OP is responsible to pay for the damage he caused? The answer is a resounding YES!

 

[JustAPal00]

Answer to what? Whether our OP is responsible to pay for the damage he caused? The answer is a resounding YES!

Even though he was given permission to drive the car and was told it was insured(what other justification was there for the $250 deductable)?

 

[moburkes]

Based solely on the information provided, the seller lied. That doesn't mean that the OP wasn't at fault. He is ulitmately responsible for the damage he caused. The seller's insurance may have accidentally lapsed, even. Who knows? OP can sue the seller for the $250, but that is completely separate from being responsible for an accident that he caused.

 

[JustAPal00]

Insurance doesn't accidentally lapse! It lapses because people don't pay the premium. My point is merely that because the seller charged the OP an additional $250 as an insurance deductable he comitted fraud! The OP must have been led to believe that the car he was driving was insured when the accident happened, or why else would he have paid a deductable? The original seller should be held responsable for the entire bill!

 

[Zigner]

The original seller should be held responsable for the entire bill!

How do you figure that? Exactly what did the seller of the car do to cause damage to someone else? Did he have a remote control that caused the vehicle to veer off course at an inopportune time?
The seller did not cause this accident, our OP did.

 

[JustAPal00]

How do you figure that? Exactly what did the seller of the car do to cause damage to someone else? Did he have a remote control that caused the vehicle to veer off course at an inopportune time?
The seller did not cause this accident, our OP did.

He simply told the driver he was insured and charged a deductable. You can't tell someone you have insurance and then after an accident say "oops just kidding" but you still owe me $250 for my deductable! The question is would the OP have driven the car if prior to the test drive the seller had told him that he had no insurance on the car? The owner represented the fact that the car was insured by charging a deductable. The OP should take the original owner to court. That is why I asked if the bill of sale had $250 for the insurance deductable written on it. It will be his word against the original owners if not!

 

[moburkes]

Yes, he can sue the owner for the deductible back. However, the deductible covers the damage to the OWNER's CAR, not the liability for the vehicle that was hit. I have no idea why he would pay a deductible to repair the not at fault party's vehicle.

However, the bottom line is that he caused an accident, and he can't be sure that OPs insruance company offers permissive use coverage. And, what if the damages that he caused exceeded the policy coverages. Would he expect the seller to cover those damages as well?

 

[Zigner]

He simply told the driver he was insured and charged a deductable. You can't tell someone you have insurance and then after an accident say "oops just kidding" but you still owe me $250 for my deductable! The question is would the OP have driven the car if prior to the test drive the seller had told him that he had no insurance on the car? The owner represented the fact that the car was insured by charging a deductable. The OP should take the original owner to court. That is why I asked if the bill of sale had $250 for the insurance deductable written on it. It will be his word against the original owners if not!

You know...it IS possible to get comp/collision without having liability coverage