Car accident while working, employer placing all liability on me.

[arno0024]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Minnesota.

I work for a private, for-profit group home company. I am required to own a car with current auto insurance, and then to transport clients (adults with disabilities) on community outings, shopping trips, medical appointments, etc.

Back in June I got into a car accident while eturning to the group home after taking clients to the mall. The driver in front of me slammed on his brakes in a 50 mph zone at an intersection when the light turned yellow. I slammed on my brakes too, but it wasn't fast enough. The other driver fled the scene and my car was no longer drive-able. Per company policy, I called 911. The two clients were cleared to go home by the EMT. One of the clients has an incredibly over protective mother, however, and forced my supervisor to take the client to the doctor the next day for a check up, which came back clean.

Fast forward to a few days ago. I was contacted by a company representative and was asked for my insurance claim number because they had just received the client's medical bills. I told them I did not submit a claim. The accident was a hit and run and I drove a 1990 Honda Accord; I was better off to sell it for junk and finally get a new car. I was then told in more or less words that I must now submit a claim so that my insurance can pay for his medical bills.

Is this legal? It certainly feels unethical. Should they not bare the liability considering I was performing a work duty?

 

[Eekamouse]

Why should they have to pay anything for your negligence? You rear-ended someone because you were following too close. The accident was completely your fault. It doesn't matter at all that they drove off before the police got there. You still were following too close to avoid hitting them. That's on you. What did you think the requirement to carry insurance on your vehicle was for if not for just this type of situation?

 

[FlyingRon]

First off, you need to report accidents (whether you're making a claim or not) to your insurer. The fact that you injured your passengers means you should have told them. Despite the fact that your employer is also liable, doesn't obviate your (and your insurers) liability for claims.

 

[ecmst12]

This was NOT a hit and run - you are the one who did the hitting! Both you and your employer are potentially liable. But you need to report the accident to your insurance company and let them figure out who pays between them and your employer's insurance.

 

[commentator]

Hitting someone in the rear end, no matter why they stopped, or whether they slammed on their brakes unexpectedly, or whether they stayed around for the discussion with the police...it's always considered your fault. And if you were in an accident, you always report it. standard operating procedure. Putting all the blame on me, you say, but yes, when you rear-end another car, you had an at fault accident, even if it was truly unavoidable. The other person left because you told them to, right? Probably because they didn't have a driver's license, or car insurance, something like that.

 

[arno0024]

Hitting someone in the rear end, no matter why they stopped, or whether they slammed on their brakes unexpectedly, or whether they stayed around for the discussion with the police...it's always considered your fault. And if you were in an accident, you always report it. standard operating procedure. Putting all the blame on me, you say, but yes, when you rear-end another car, you had an at fault accident, even if it was truly unavoidable. The other person left because you told them to, right? Probably because they didn't have a driver's license, or car insurance, something like that.

The person fled without ever getting out of his car or any words exchanged. Slamming your brakes in a 50 MPH zone when you are at an intersection (to the point where he was already in the intersection BEFORE I hit him) is borderline erratic, and I think he knew that. Let me also say that I called 911 per company policy and the officer, who I had to tell the 100% god honest truth to, with the clients as my witness, did not write me a ticket. Regardless, I understand that in these kind of situations it is always my fault in the eyes of the insurer, who, for the record, I did inform of the accident. But no claim - in the sense that money was paid out - was filed. Additionally, the client was NOT hurt and was cleared to go home by an EMT. Like I said, this is an overprotective mother who decided to take her son to a clinic the next day "just to make sure."

Even still, there is a heart to this legal question that I believe is complicated, which is that for $10.75 an hour and 30 cent per mile reimbursement, I am expected (required) to drive these clients all over the place (we live in a metro of 3.5 million, so an 80 mile trip, for example, is not out of the question). I find it unethical at best that I am financial liable for them in the case of an accident, and the company bares none of it, despite the fact that they profit off of my driving.

 

[swalsh411]

That's a risk you accepted when you took the job.

But you don't know how this matter will resolve itself until the process works itself out. It could be that your employer has deeper pockets so that's who the injured party's attorney will go after for the medical bills.

 

[Zigner]

Slamming your brakes in a 50 MPH zone when you are at an intersection (to the point where he was already in the intersection BEFORE I hit him) is borderline erratic...

And, following so closely as to not be able stop in time for a situation like this is over-the-line negligent.

...I understand that in these kind of situations it is always my fault in the eyes of the insurer...

It's your fault because you were following too closely.

...Like I said, this is an overprotective mother who decided to take her son to a clinic the next day "just to make sure."...

I sure would have done the same thing.

Even still, there is a heart to this legal question that I believe is complicated, which is that for $10.75 an hour and 30 cent per mile reimbursement, I am expected (required) to drive these clients all over the place (we live in a metro of 3.5 million, so an 80 mile trip, for example, is not out of the question). I find it unethical at best that I am financial liable for them in the case of an accident, and the company bares none of it, despite the fact that they profit off of my driving.

It's not unethical to expect an employee that causes an accident due to their negligence to be held responsible for such negligence. It's really not.

 

[davew128]

Hitting someone in the rear end, no matter why they stopped, or whether they slammed on their brakes unexpectedly, or whether they stayed around for the discussion with the police...it's always considered your fault.

Well THATS not true at all.

 

[Dave1952]

Let's return to your question. "I was then told in more or less words that I must now submit a claim so that my insurance can pay for his medical bills.

Is this legal? It certainly feels unethical. Should they not bare the liability considering I was performing a work duty? "

You knew and agreed to transport clients in your car. If the ethics of this bothered you, now is not the time to debate this. You have insurance. Call them and let them represent you.

 

[swalsh411]

It's not unethical to expect an employee that causes an accident due to their negligence to be held responsible for such negligence. It's really not.

It hasn't been established that there is negligence. It's certainly not true that anytime there is a rear-end collision the read-ender (lol) is ALWAYS at fault.

 

[latigo]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Minnesota.

I work for a private, for-profit group home company. I am required to own a car with current auto insurance, and then to transport clients (adults with disabilities) on community outings, shopping trips, medical appointments, etc.

Back in June I got into a car accident while eturning to the group home after taking clients to the mall. The driver in front of me slammed on his brakes in a 50 mph zone at an intersection when the light turned yellow. I slammed on my brakes too, but it wasn't fast enough. The other driver fled the scene and my car was no longer drive-able. Per company policy, I called 911. The two clients were cleared to go home by the EMT. One of the clients has an incredibly over protective mother, however, and forced my supervisor to take the client to the doctor the next day for a check up, which came back clean.

Fast forward to a few days ago. I was contacted by a company representative and was asked for my insurance claim number because they had just received the client's medical bills. I told them I did not submit a claim. The accident was a hit and run and I drove a 1990 Honda Accord; I was better off to sell it for junk and finally get a new car. I was then told in more or less words that I must now submit a claim so that my insurance can pay for his medical bills.

Is this legal? It certainly feels unethical. Should they not bare the liability considering I was performing a work duty?

"Car accident while working, employer placing all liability on me"?

One would need to be abjectly naïve to assume that that they are immune from personal liability for their negligent conduct simply because that conduct occurred in the course of their employment. But you certainly seem to qualify.

The legalities are that both YOU and your employer are civilly liable, jointly and severally, for the damages resulting from the collision. You, because you negligently caused it, and the employer by reason of the master servant principle of “respondeat superior“ (Latin: The master answers for the servant.)

The only question remaining is whether or not the employer and/or its insurer has recourse against you for reimbursement of any amounts they are required to pay in satisfaction of any of those civil claims. (But my recollection of the law is that the negligence must be shown to be exceeding gross or wanton.)

And not timely reporting the accident to your insurer was utterly foolish as such failure could void the coverage.

Also, there is nothing in your post justifying your statement (caption) that your employer is attempting to cast to total liability upon you. Or is acting "unethical" or "illegal" in any fashion!

All you have reported is that it is requesting that you involve own insurance carrier and for your obvious benefit. Undoubtedly it has already notified its own carrier.

If anyone is acting unreasonable here, it is you.

 

[davew128]

OP, do you have a rider on your insurance policy covering you for business use of the vehicle?

 

[ecmst12]

This will probably not be considered "business use of the vehicle" under his insurance policy.

There are situations where you can hit someone from behind and not be at fault. This is NOT one of them. If someone in front of you slams on their brakes and you hit them, it's because you were following too closely, PERIOD. If you had been following at an appropriate, safe distance, and paying proper time and attention, you would have been able to react to the brake slamming in time to not hit them. This is most definitely 100% your fault.

And it doesn't matter that the checkups the passenger had revealed no injuries, you and your employer are still liable to pay for the medical bills. It was perfectly reasonable for the passenger to be examined by a doctor due to the accident. Most of the time, injuries from less severe accidents don't show up right away, you don't feel it until the next day or a few days later. No one is going to find it questionable in the slightest. Between your insurance and your employer's insurance, it will be taken care of and you won't have anything to worry about.

And if the person who you hit happens to track you down, you'll be liable to pay for the damage to his car as well. And again, between your insurance and your employer's insurance, it will be covered.

 

[justalayman]

@ecmst12

Why would this not be considered using the vehicle for business purposes when they were transporting clients on an outing? Sure sounds like work purposes to me.


Op, if you continue with this sort of work you need to speak with your insurance company. Often times personal insurance specically excludes coverage if you use the vehicle for business purposes. While it is obviously not settled between the respondents here, regardless you should check with your insurance company

I see this as no different than a pizza delivery guy delivering pizzas and yes, such employees insurance has been known to deny coverage when they are at fault for an accident.

I would suggest you consider bringing up the issue of your employer covering you directly on their insurance with your employer.