Posted on behalf of Arnold Law Firm
on April 1, 2015 in Auto Accident
Updated on February 24, 2022
Uber and Lyft, the worlds foremost ride-sharing applications, have been facing widespread litigation since they first launched.
The most recent legal conflict facing the two California-based technology companies and competitors concerns the issue of insurance coverage. At issue is whose insurance policy applies when an Uber or Lyft driver is involved in an accident.
The problem arises because there are times when a drivers personal insurance policy does not apply and when the ride-sharing companies insurance policies also do not apply.
For example, when a driver who is carrying a passenger is involved in an accident, both the insurance policies of the ride-share app, be it Uber or Lyft, will apply. Additionally, if the driver is not carrying a passenger and is not working for Uber or Lyft at the moment of the accident, then the drivers personal insurance policy will apply.
However, if the driver is on the way to pick up a customer or is driving around waiting for a customer when the accident occurs, then neither Uber and Lyft nor the personal insurance policies will apply.
This creates a problem called gap-coverage, which is used to describe those accidents where no ones insurance policy will apply.
California legislators have devoted substantial time and effort to creating legislation that resolves gap-coverage issues.
The California Department of Insurance, state insurance companies and legislators have cobbled together a new law that will go into effect July 1, 2015.
The law, AB2293, will address Period 1, which is used to identify that period in time when an Uber or Lyft driver is working but is not carrying a passenger.
The law calls for personal insurance policies to offer coverage policies that eliminate the gap in coverage. Minimum coverage rates include:
Regardless of how the ridesharing programs and applications are insured, the most important thing is that new policies and laws protect the rights of drivers and passengers.
Uber and Lyft, insurance companies and legislators have banded together to craft legislation that ensures the safety of California residents. Nonetheless, Arnold Law Firm attorneys will remain vigilant to ensure that car accident victims can still get the financial compensation they deserve after an accident.
If you or a loved one has been involved in an Uber or Lyft accident, contact a Sacramento personal injury lawyer at Arnold Law Firm today by calling (916) 777-7777 or use the Free Case Evaluation. We offer all potential clients a free consultation.
"*" indicates required fields
The Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Morgan Stanley data breach class action lawsuit. The settlement resulted in a $60 million settlement fund to benefit class members.
Learn MoreA whistleblower case exposing fraudulent practices in the state of California resulted in an $18.275 million settlement.
Learn MoreThe Arnold Law Firm reached a settlement in the Kemper and Infinity data breach class action lawsuit. The settlement is valued at over $17 million.
Learn MoreThe Arnold Law Firm is pleased to report that our attorneys received a $10.2 million verdict handed down in Modesto. Defense counsel was Kevin Cholakian of San Francisco. The defense rejected a 998 within the $1 million policy limits three years ago. The highest defense offer was $350k. The case involved a blind corner dirt […]
Learn MoreLate one spring afternoon, the Arnold Law Firm received a call from Angela, a young mother of three. She was calling from the hospital where her husband Christopher had been air-lifted for treatment of severe injuries from a tragic motor vehicle accident earlier that day. Angela’s mother, a past client of our firm, had encouraged […]
Learn MoreThe fatal collision between plaintiff’s Jeep Liberty and defendant’s Volvo truck left Ryan Eisenbrandt’s surviving wife and parents with a judgment of $3.9 million, but the defendant’s insurance company refused to pay. This resulted in a second, intense legal battle between Plaintiffs and Defendant’s insurance company. During the pendency of the wrongful death case, Defendant’s […]
Learn More