Friend caused accident

[sweetvirginia]

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

1. I let my friend borrow my car (registered and titled in my name) and he caused a car accident. I have a feeling that he's underinsured.

2. Am I personally responsible for this accident since I own the car he was driving? The damage he caused will probably be higher than my insurance coverage as well.

3. If I am personally responsible, and my insurance doesn't cover the entire bill, can I win a lawsuit against my friend he if doesn't agree to reimburse me for anything I have to pay out of my pocket?

[ecmst12]

You and your friend are both liable. Your insurance will pay first. If he has insurance as well, that will likely act as secondary payor.

[sweetvirginia]

Doggonit, that's what I was afraid of.

So both of our insurances will pay combined? That may cover all the damage. If it doesn't can I win a lawsuit against my friend? Here's the thing, if anybody will be sued by the injured guy it'll be me because I own a business and have other assets. My friend doesn't really have anything. I have a bullseye on my back. If I do get sued and lose, I'd still like to try to go after my friend (maybe garnish his wages for the next 50 years).

Thanks.

[Blue Meanie]

Originally Posted by sweetvirginia

Doggonit, that's what I was afraid of.

So both of our insurances will pay combined? That may cover all the damage. If it doesn't can I win a lawsuit against my friend? Here's the thing, if anybody will be sued by the injured guy it'll be me because I own a business and have other assets. My friend doesn't really have anything. I have a bullseye on my back. If I do get sued and lose, I'd still like to try to go after my friend (maybe garnish his wages for the next 50 years).

Thanks.

What are the alleged damages? Was the other party injured?

[ecmst12]

Wrong, if there is a lawsuit you will BOTH be named.

[JakeB]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

Wrong, if there is a lawsuit you will BOTH be named.

Incredibly, you've retained nothing from this thread: http://forum.freeadvice.com/auto-accidents-vehicle-claims-1/am-i-responsible-sons-accident-468729.html

OP: In Virginia, the owner of a vehicle is not liable for the negligence of a driver of that vehicle unless there is an agency relationship.

[ecmst12]

That is wrong as well. The outcome of the lawsuit is unknown. But if there is a lawsuit, both the driver and the owner WILL be named. There is no question about that. Both will have to present a defense (provided by your insurance company or yourself) and both have the POTENTIAL to have a judgement entered against them. It is NOT a sure thing that the owner will not be found liable by a judge or jury, nor is it a sure thing that they WILL be found liable. But it is a fact that both CAN potentially be found liable and should protect themselves accordingly.

[JakeB]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

That is wrong as well. The outcome of the lawsuit is unknown. But if there is a lawsuit, both the driver and the owner WILL be named. There is no question about that. Both will have to present a defense (provided by your insurance company or yourself) and both have the POTENTIAL to have a judgement entered against them. It is NOT a sure thing that the owner will not be found liable by a judge or jury, nor is it a sure thing that they WILL be found liable. But it is a fact that both CAN potentially be found liable and should protect themselves accordingly.

There you go backpedaling again. Nobody is arguing about whether the OP will be named in a lawsuit. Maybe he will. The OP wanted to know if he's liable as the owner of the vehicle. The answer is NO.

And to be honest, I seriously doubt he'll be named as a defendant if the plaintiff alleges nothing except that the OP is the owner. That could amount to a frivolous lawsuit.

[MikeKV]

Hey JakeB. Here's a bit of advice. I wouldn't argue with ecmst12. Why? She knows her stuff when it comes to Auto Insurance issues.

[JakeB]

Originally Posted by MikeKV

Hey JakeB. Here's a bit of advice. I wouldn't argue with ecmst12. Why? She knows her stuff when it comes to Auto Insurance issues.

First, this isn't an auto insurance issue. The OP didn't ask for a quote. This is a legal issue.

Second, here's a bit of advice for both you and ecmst12: I wouldn't argue with the Virginia Supreme Court. Why? They know their stuff when it comes to Virginia legal issues.

"Under Virginia's substantive law regarding tort liability, an automobile owner is not vicariously liable for the negligence of another person simply because the negligent party was operating the vehicle with the owner's permission." - Dreher v. Budget Rent-a-Car System,Virginia Supreme Court, 2006

[ecmst12]

YOU don't get to decide if the owner is liable. Only the judge or jury presiding over the case gets to decide. It is NOT a black and white answer, it will not be the same in every case. You need to stop spreading misinformation.

[JakeB]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

YOU don't get to decide if the owner is liable. Only the judge or jury presiding over the case gets to decide. It is NOT a black and white answer, it will not be the same in every case. You need to stop spreading misinformation.

Who's spreading misinformation? Let's see:

OP's Question: Am I personally responsible for this accident since I own the car he was driving?

ecmst12's Answer: You and your friend are both liable.

Jake's Answer: In Virginia, the owner of a vehicle is not liable for the negligence of a driver of that vehicle unless there is an agency relationship.

Virginia Supreme Court's Answer: an automobile owner is not vicariously liable for the negligence of another person simply because the negligent party was operating the vehicle with the owner's permission.

Who's answer is more in line with the Virginia Supreme Court? Gee, that's a tough one.



edit: And for good measure, this is also from the VSC in the same case: "vicarious liability imposed when master-servant relationship exists if the servant was acting within the scope of employment."

Master-servant, as in agency. Isn't that what I wrote? Oh yeah, it's exactly what I wrote.

Who's spreading misinformation again?



Now, will ecm have the courage to admit that he/she's wrong, or will ecm attempt another backpedal? I'd got odds on the latter.

[JakeB]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

You need to stop spreading misinformation.

By the way, I love that I'm supposedly spreading misinformation by directly quoting the Virginia Supreme Court. Good laugh.

[tranquility]

Vicarious liability is relationship or substitute liability and not liability related to actions. In other words, since the car was loaned the owner is responsible. This would be vicarious liability and is apparently prohibited. (I did not read the case but trust the description.)

However, that does not mean the negligence of the owner can't be a cause of action in and of itself. The driver must defend his actions and if it is negligence. The owner might have to as well. How? Two ways. One would be negligent entrustment. Was the driver licensed? How old was he? Was he drunk or on drugs at the time? Anything which the plaintiff can hang on how a reasonable person should not have loaned the car the the particular driver could be negligent entrustment. Second, what about the upkeep of the car? Tires inflated? Brakes work? All appropriate mechanical items in good working order? If there is a problem here, both the plaintiff may have cause of action directly against the owner's negligence and the defendant/driver may have cause of action against the owner for contribution/indemnification for the same negligence.

The OP will be named. He will have to defend his own actions even though, if the interpretation of the case is correct, he will not have vicarious liability.

[JakeB]

Of course the OP is liable for his own negligence.

But I disagree that he'll be a defendant in some kind of kitchen sink complaint. The plaintiff will need to allege something that makes sense, or the OP will win a MSJ, and possibly even attorney's fees.