Accident in dealer car (MD)

leupi · #1 05-31-2007, 07:37 PM

I live in Maryland and my wife was test driving a new car at a dealership and has an accident (her fault). It was really just a fenderbender. She is not a US citizen, she is here on a visa and we are working on her citizenship, and as such she has an international drivers license and a drivers license from her native country. I am American and have a MD state license and have an insured vehicle, as my car is a standard and she cannot drive a standard, she is not listed as a driver on my insurance.

The salesman was informed that my wife had an international drivers license and he never even asked to see it, he only looked at mine and made a copy of it, he never looked at hers. In fact, when the police asked him if he saw her license and he replied that he had not, they ticketed him for that.

The dealer wants us to pay the repair bill for both vehicles since the accident was her fault. The dealer car has about $1600 worth of damage and the other car much less. I was of the impression that the dealers insured their cars and it was their responsibility to cover any accidents through their own insurance. They are threatening me with legal action if I do not pay this bill. Who is legally responsible for this?

As I have already purchesed a new car from this dealer and was about to by a second, I find this to be very short sighted on their part. I appreciate any thoughts on this.

Thanks.

JETX · #2 05-31-2007, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leupi

I was of the impression that the dealers insured their cars and it was their responsibility to cover any accidents through their own insurance.

They might have insurance, but since they were not at fault.... they have no obligation to provide coverage for THIRD party liability.

Quote:

They are threatening me with legal action if I do not pay this bill. Who is legally responsible for this?

Your wife is 100% liable for her conduct.

leupi · #3 05-31-2007, 08:18 PM

Thanks for the response. So am I to take it that my wife was driving a car in Maryland while being uninsured? That seems to open up a lot of liability, not to mention that it would be illegal also. It seems to me that the dealer was acting a bit irresponsible in not even looking at her drivers license (knowing that it was international). So if I do not own a car, and have no insurance, I cannot legally test drive a dealer car as I would be driving uninsured? This does not make sense to me. And I mean no offence to you either and I appreciate your response, this just seems to have lots of serious implications if the dealer is not to be held responible; why would they even have insurance in the first place?

Thanks again.

leupi · #4 05-31-2007, 08:20 PM

BTW, I saw your sig and thought that you might enjoy this:
[url]http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/france.html[/url]

justalayman · #5 05-31-2007, 08:23 PM

it's not that the car was not uninsured (which I would bet it is) it is that insurance pays for the insureds liabilities. The insured had no liability in this accident, your wife does.

Your wife owes for her negligence. Why would you think the dealerships insurance company should have to pay for your wifes error?

leupi · #6 05-31-2007, 08:41 PM

Because that is what insurance is for. It is a cost of business for them. If their insurance does not cover, then they should not allow an uninsured person to drive their car. What if she had had a serious accident that caused serious personal injury to someone. Would she just plain get sued to the point that we lose the house? What if she plowed into someones $80,000 Mercedes? Would she be required to buy that person a new one and replace the dealers car (all out of pocket)? That is way we have laws that you cannot drive while uninsured. I find it difficult to believe that an uninsured person can be allowed to drive a car on the highway when it is in fact a state law that all drivers be insured. It just does not add up to me.

Thanks.

Zigner · #7 05-31-2007, 09:01 PM

Leupi - your wife is responsible.

Let's say the dealer DID involve their insurance company. Said insurance company would then come after her to pay for the damage she caused...

moburkes · #8 06-01-2007, 07:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by leupi

Because that is what insurance is for. It is a cost of business for them. If their insurance does not cover, then they should not allow an uninsured person to drive their car. What if she had had a serious accident that caused serious personal injury to someone. Would she just plain get sued to the point that we lose the house? What if she plowed into someones $80,000 Mercedes? Would she be required to buy that person a new one and replace the dealers car (all out of pocket)? That is way we have laws that you cannot drive while uninsured. I find it difficult to believe that an uninsured person can be allowed to drive a car on the highway when it is in fact a state law that all drivers be insured. It just does not add up to me.

Thanks.

Yes, that is what insurance is for. However, they don't have an obligation to pay. For example, you drive my car, and I have insurance. However, I do not have collision coverage, since it is not required by any law. You get into an accident. My insurance company will pay for the damage to the other party's vehicle, and their medical bills, if any. However, they won't pay for the damage to my car, since I don't have collision coverage. Now, two things. 1. You caused the accident, SO, the insurance company has the right to ask you to give them their money back. You were the at fault driver, not me. 2. You caused the accident, SO, you are responsible for the damage you caused, which includes the damage to my car. I can sue you for the repairs. Let's say that I do have collision, but the deductible is $1000, and the damage is only $800. My insurance won't pay, because I haven't met the deductible yet. Let's say the deductible is $500. The insurance company can sue you for the deductible, or I can sue you for the deductible, or the insurance company can sue you for the full $800.

In your situation, the dealership's deductible is probably $2000 or $5000 or $10000. So, their insurance CAN'T fix the vehicle, because the damage was under the deductible.

FlyingRon · #9 06-01-2007, 10:33 AM

Actually, I suspect the dealership's insurance WOULD cover this. However, they'd most likely still try subrogating against the test driver.

moburkes · #10 06-01-2007, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

Actually, I suspect the dealership's insurance WOULD cover this. However, they'd most likely still try subrogating against the test driver.

I, apparently, skipped over the part about the other vehicle. Many business policies don't carry first dollar liability coverage. They pay the smaller claims themselves. I'm guessing that this busines has a similar policy, therefore, there is little or no damage above the deductible, which means that it doesn't make sense to file the claim.

You Are Guilty · #11 06-01-2007, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FlyingRon

Actually, I suspect the dealership's insurance WOULD cover this. However, they'd most likely still try subrogating against the test driver.

I'd change the "would" to "could" before agreeing with you.

That said, I enjoy the OP's argument that it's the dealer's fault for "allowing" an unlicensed, uninsured driver to have the accident. It's the same way when I rob a bank - it's really the bank's fault for having all that awesome money locked up there!

ecmst12 · #12 06-01-2007, 02:29 PM

Speaking of responsibility, isn't OP just as responsible as the dealership for "letting" his uninsured, unlicensed wife drive the dealer's car? I mean, if he's going to blame them, he's gotta blame himself too.

leupi · #13 06-01-2007, 03:53 PM

Guys,
My wife is legally licensed to drive in this country, I never said that she wasn't. She does not have a car and therefore does not have car insurance, nothing illegal there. My understanding was that the dealer cars are insured and therefore my wife was not breaking any laws by driving one. Now the dealer is saying that their insurance does not cover my wife while driving their car. She was basically driving that car uninsured, if there was a serious accident and someone was hurt or there was serious damage to another vehicle, according to the dealer, she would just get sued for all monies owed even though the car was insured. So, my wife is NOT unlicensed, and I would never have guessed that she, while test driving an insured dealer car, was uninsured.

CraigFL · #14 06-01-2007, 04:42 PM

My guess is the dealer's car is insured. My guess is also that they will use their insurance to cover it if they can't get payment from the person at fault which in this case is your wife. It's the same thing that would happen if someone hit your car-- you would not want to rely on your insurance if you could get the person that hit you to pay.

You Are Guilty · #15 06-01-2007, 04:57 PM

Assuming MD is like most states, an int'l driver's license isn't a valid license. I only had time to do a 3 second search, but this popped up which seems to support the argument:
[url]http://www.marylandmva.com/Resources/DL-197.pdf[/url]

If someone has a cite to the specific MD law, that would be helpful though.