Some do. I work for an insurance company and many will take ownership of the accident.
If there is no other vehicle involved in the accident, then the only person who can be at fault is the underage driver.
No, but if involved in an accident, even when not at fault, the drunk driver would still be guilty of, and could be charged with, DUI.
Not really sure actually. In the eye of the law the accident will most likely be considered your fault.
I was recently involved in a car accident in which the driver of the other car is legally at fault. Is the other party's insurance still liable for damages involved if the at fault driver is: 1. not the owner of the car, 2. not the insurer of the car, 3. does not have a license. Thanks!
If you are involved in an automobile accident caused by another driver, and that driver carries no insurance, your no-fault clause is designed to protect your financial interests.
You can automatically be at fault in an auto accident if you are the only driver involved; you were the driver who was not obeying the speed limit; if you were the driver who was not using safe driving rules; if you were breaking a law; if you were impaired. The most common cause for automatically being at fault is driving too close to the car ahead of you for the speed you are going and driving over the speed limit. None of these conditions are 100% automatically your fault but very close to that, especially if others involved in the accident were not doing any of the above.
The liability, or fault-factor in an accident has nothing to do with whether or not a driver was licensed. The liability in an accident at an uncontrolled intersection can be shared. Several factors go into a case like that & would need to be fully investigated to determine.
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.
the driver at fault
bananners!
They both are. The logic being that the unlicensed driver shouldn't have been there in the first place, and would not have been involved in the accident if they'd been in compliance with the law.
If he was at fault, regardless of whether he was pulling a camper or not, he would be responsible. Pulling a camper doesnt make you responsible for an accident if that was the only thing you did wrong. If someone rear-ended him, its their fault, if he rear ended someone or ran a red light, then yes, its his fault.