• About Angela

North Carolina Litigation Blog

North Carolina Litigation Blog

Tag Archives: UIM

When Is A Borrowed Car Covered Under Your Automobile Insurance Policy As A Substitute Vehicle?

07 Monday Jun 2010

Posted by McIlveen Family Law Firm in Insurance, Insurance Coverage, NC Law

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Coverage, Insurance, Insured, N.C. Law, UIM, UM

Consider the following, you are a small businessperson and the vehicle

Jennifer Meyers / The Post-Standard

you normally drive is owned by and insured under your business automobile insurance policy. One day your normal vehicle, the one insured under the policy, is low on gas or maybe it needs new brakes so you borrow your wife’s car for the day. Unfortunately, you are involved in a horrible accident and incur several hundred thousand dollars worth of medical bills. The person who hits your vehicle has little or no insurance. Your wife’s vehicle has a $100,000 policy. The company policy for the vehicle you normally drive is $1million in coverage. Are you covered under your company’s automobile policy’s uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage? The answer is it depends.

Typical UIM language in an automobile policy might include the following:

B. Who is An Insured

If the named insured is designated in the Declarations as:

2. A partnership, limited liability company, corporation or any other form of organization then the following are “insured”:

a.         Anyone “occupying” a covered”auto” or a temporary substitute for a covered “auto”. The covered “auto” must be out of service because of its breakdown, repair, servicing, “loss” or destruction.

The analysis to the above hypothetical revolves around determining what is meant by out of service because of a “breakdown, repair, servicing, “loss” or destruction” of your covered auto. In Ransom v. Fidelity and Casualty Co., 250 N.C. 60 (1959), the N.C. Supreme Court held that Francis Lee who drove his brother’s car because his own car was low on gas was not covered under his insurance policy because his car was not withdrawn from normal use. In Maryland Casualty Co. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 83 N.C. App. 140 (1986), the court held that Thomas who had borrowed a truck that day did not have coverage under his insurance policy because even though his covered vehicle was rusted and worn out it was not withdrawn from normal use. However, perhaps if your insured vehicle needed repairs you would be safe to borrow another car for the day. In Martini v. Companion Property and Casualty Ins. Co. the N.C. Court of Appeals found coverage for Douglas Martini who had borrow his wife’s car for the day because his Sequoia, insured under his company policy, was in need of new brakes. The court distinguished Martini’s case from Ransom and Maryland and found the facts more in line with the decision in Nationwide v. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co., 279 N.C. 240 (1971) which held that coverage did exist for a man who borrowed a vehicle while having his insured vehicle painted.

The moral of this story is be careful when you borrow someone else’s car that they either have adequate insurance coverage or that your own insured vehicle is truly out of service otherwise you might be left without insurance coverage.

Share this:

  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Like this:

Like Loading...

UM/UIM Coverage is Now Mandatory for Most in NC

03 Thursday Jun 2010

Posted by McIlveen Family Law Firm in Insurance

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Insurance, N.C. Law, UIM, UM

Drivers in North Carolina no longer have the option to select or reject Uninsured Motorist coverage (UM) or Underinsured Motorist coverage (UIM).  UM coverage provides insurance coverage when an individual is involved in an accident with a vehicle that does not have insurance. UM insurance provides coverage both for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. North Carolina now requires all drivers to carry both types of UM insurance. UIM coverage provides insurance coverage when an individual is involved in an accident and the other driver does not have enough insurance coverage to pay for all of the person’s injuries.

Beginning on January 1, 2009, The North Carolina Financial Responsibility Act as Amended by House Bill 738 requires that all automobile insurance policies in North Carolina have UM coverage and UIM coverage. The 2009 amendments provide the insured with the ability to purchase greater or lesser limits of coverage provided that the UM/UIM bodily injury limits shall not be less than 30/60. Unless the insured purchases greater or lesser limits of coverage the UM/UIM bodily injury limits shall be equal to the highest injury liability limits for any one vehicle insured under the policy. The UM property damage limits shall be equal to the highest property damage liability limits for any one vehicle insured under the policy. The insured may purchase UM property damage that is less than the policy’s liability limits for property damage provided that the UM property damage limits may not be less than $25,000 per accident.

Aside from requiring UM /UIM coverage, the Amendment eliminates the Selection/Rejection Form and made changes to section (m) which requires the insurer to provide reasonable notice of the options available to the insured.

Share this:

  • Print
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Like this:

Like Loading...

ABOUT ANGELA

  • About Angela

SUBSCRIBE

RSS Feed RSS - Posts

RSS Feed RSS - Comments

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 8 other subscribers

TOPICS

  • Criminal
  • Insurance
  • Insurance Coverage
  • law
  • Liability
  • NC Court of Appeals
  • NC Law
  • NC Supreme Court
  • Negligence
  • News
  • Products Liability
  • trial

Blogroll

  • Gastonia Family Law Blog
  • North Carolina Appellate Law
  • North Carolina Business Litigation
  • North Carolina Construction Law
  • North Carolina Criminal Law
  • North Carolina Insurance Law

Disclaimer:

This blog is maintained as a free information service and its contents are not intended to constitute legal advice or opinion. Statutes and law vary by jurisdiction and can change without notice. Statements herein are made solely by the author and are not attributable to the McIlveen Family Law Firm. Use of this blog does not create an attorney-client relationship. The blog may fail to accurately or comprehensively represent the law or the topics discussed. Reading or commenting on this blog does not constitute a client attorney relationship. This Blog may be viewed as an advertisement under some rules. Always consider consulting with an attorney about your particular situation.

All material in this blog copyright 2010-2012.

Administrator

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.com

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • North Carolina Litigation Blog
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • North Carolina Litigation Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: