More info-- one driver was speeding down a residential street late for work and hit a parked car's slightly open door and ripped it off. The parked car driver had a license and coverage but it was a new lease and had not yet added the new car to the policy. The in-motion driver had current coverage but no drivers license. Both claim the other is At Fault. Who is more screwed?
More info-- one driver was speeding down a residential street late for work and hit a parked car's slightly open door and ripped it off. The parked car driver had a license and coverage but it was a new lease and had not yet added the new car to the policy. The in-motion driver had current coverage but no drivers license. Both claim the other is At Fault. Who is more screwed?
Whether the car is insured is not important, the point is who was at fault in causing the accident, it could be the person whose car is insured that is at fault.
The other car is at fault. If you couldn't avoid the accident and the other guy was in the wrong lane, he will be responsible for all damages.
No way of answering without knowing details of the incident.
The driver at fault is always responsible for damages incurred during an accident. The at fault insurance company is responsible for damages to your car.
The conflict of interest is at a no fault. The sentence should read "We had no fault for the car accident".
It is always the fault of the person entering into traffic when an accident occurs.
It depends what the other person in the car accident was doing.
No. If the accident was your fault, you can not get money from the other person's car insurance.
You either get the at fault party or their insurance to pay or you have a wrecked car.
It's never the dog's fault.
If there is no other vehicle involved in the accident, then the only person who can be at fault is the underage driver.
i have car accident on august 28, 2012 it was my faulte