An exact answer for this question is not possible without a lot more information, but I will try to give a partial answer in order to get this answer started. The actual and final answer will depend on Massachusetts LAW, AND investigative revelation of the true circumstances of the incident.
Many years ago I was an auto insurance adjuster in Washington state, and have lived in Texas over 50 years. Based on my experiences, and related knowledge, the answer depends on who hit who when, and in what order. I will present some different situations which would result in different drivers being libel for damages to others.
1.)IF vehicle "A," which was "rear-ended" by the uninsured vehicle ["B"], was "knocked into" the vehicle ["C"] in front of "A," THEN vehicle "A" SHOULD NOT be libel for damage to vehicle "C." The driver of vehicle "B" SHOULD be found At Fault for damage to both vehicles "A" and "C".
2.) However, IF vehicle "A" rear-ended vehicle "C," before being rear-ended by vehicle "B," THEN vehicle "A's" driver is responsible for damage to vehicle "C."
3.)However, assigning responsibility for damage really gets tough IF the investigation reveals that AFTER vehicle "A" rear-ended vehicle "C," vehicle "B" then rear-ended the vehicle "A"/vehicle "B" "stack." Theoretically, vehicle "A's" driver is only responsible to vehicle "C" for damage which vehicle "A" caused. And the driver of vehicle "B" SHOULD BE responsible for the damage caused to vehicle "A," and THE PORTION of additional damage to vehicle "C" which was actually caused by vehicle "B" "piling into" vehicles "B" AND "C."
Whew!!!!! If this confuses you, don't feel like you are alone. That's why we have armies of investigators, insurance companies, attorneys, juries, and judges. Although I couldn't give you a more definitive answer, I hope this provides some understanding of the scale of the problem, and it's resolution.
Underinsurer or uninsured Property damage coverage pays for damage to your vehicle if another vehicle is at fault for the accident but is uninsured or underinsured.
Uninsured will not cover this type of accident. Your comprehensive will cover this type of damage.
no, you are not responsible in anyway for anything that a thief does with your vehicle during the time the thief has your vehicle......now, since it was uninsured you of course have no coverage for any damage etc. to your vehicle but contact the pros. atty in your city (assuming thief was caught) and ask for restitution...........
Uninsured motorist property damage coverage is usually not required and sometimes is not offered at all in a particular state. If it is offered in your state you should consider purchasing it. One accident with an uninsured driver can leave you with significant bills to cover your property damage.
Bad things, will mostly likely get a few citation from police. If he is found to be at fault he could be liable for the damage.
Yes. It is the responsibility of the at-fault party to pay for the damage caused in an accident, regardless of the license or insurance status of the not at-fault party.
Uninsured drivers become subject to license and vehicle registration suspension when accident damages amount to:
Assuming in this instance the uninsured driver is the one at fault, he or she is still liable for any property damage & personal injuries that may have resulted from the accident. The injured party will make a claim against his or her uninsured motorist policy. But that insurance company can, and often will, sue the uninsured driver.
Are you saying that you are uninsured, and the drunk was at fault, if simply due to the fact that you were uninsured (and of no fault whatsoever), you have to pay for his vehicle? NO, the ''at fault/negligent" party is liable/responsible for the damages they caused due to their neglience. Subject to any laws in your state barring uninsured drivers/owners from recovery of damage. But just because you are uninsured (if not at fault) you are not responsible for the drunks damages.
UM PD (Uninsured Motorist, Property Damage) may not cover hit and run because this coverage kicks in only when the other party causing the accident is legally uninsured. Since there is no evidence that the other party was legally uninsured then coverage is not provided unless the other hit and run vehicle is discovered and is ruled to be legally uninsured at the time of hit and run accident.
If you are at fault in an accident, You are responsible for any personal injuries and the reasonable cost of repair for for the damage to the other vehicle that you hit. The level of damage to your own vehicle does not mitigate the cost of the damage to the vehicle you hit. After all you still caused the damage and you are responsible for it.
If you are uninsured then of course not.