... about Auto Insurance and Auto Safety.

Today's question will involve liability decisions (I'll turn some of you into Claim Reps yet). These will very simple scenarios. Maybe tomorrow, I'll give you some that involve multiple vehicles (I worked a claim today that involved 6 cars and 8 injured drivers/passengers) :impatient .

Okay, here you go... have fun...

Which of the following would be considered an at-fault accident(s) ?

A. It’s dark outside and while driving without your lights on, you strike a deer.

B. You hit a pothole and severely damage your tire.

C. You swerve to avoid a cow and hit a tree.

D. A truck traveling ahead of you loses a crate off the back and as it’s rolling down the road, you strike it.

E. You hit a moose and while investigating the accident, the police officer arrests you for DUI.

 

Ummmm.... A?
My thought is that the driver didn't take proper precautions... or any for that matter.

 

I'm going with C

 

Hey, B.A.D. ! How are those grille badges working out for you ?

 

Yes to all.

 

All of the above.

 

Great, I got my grille badge holder from Outmotoring and picked up another badge while I was there.

 

A, C and E.

A, because you're an idiot to drive without light.

C, because you're supposed to maintain control over your vehicle at all time, and the fact you had to swerve in order to avoid the cow means you were driving too fast not to be able to brake in time to avoid hitting the cow.

E, because DUI pretty much trump it all, even if you'd have hit the moose while sober anyway. Hmm, maybe I'm not so sure about this answer....

Now the other answers that I don't think are at fault:
B is probably covered under comprehensive coverage--one of those <bleep> happen.
D, the fault lies with the truck, especially if you tried to take evasive action without success.

 

Either that or you're too drunk to notice you're driving in a pasture.

 

Well, I'm gonna have to guess and say all of the above, however.....

I would talk my way out of any of them....

A. The lights were off because the car was off, parked on the side of the road when all of a sudden and big rig hit a dear and it landed on my front end! It really ruined my girls mood too!!!!

B. I went to Safeway, did some shopping, when I came out and hopped in my car, something was wrong. Someone must have hit my car!!!!

C. I don't know what tree your talking about, whiled parked on the side of the road telling my buddies a story about a dear being hit into my car, a cow came and sat on my front end, when I honked at him, he shat himself, must of had bark for lunch!!!!!

D. I lied, can't talk my way out of this one, I'm hoping you will give me good news and say it is not my fault, or at least only half at fault????

E. *deep breath*, "Officer".... lol, you wouldn't believe my luck at this spot I pulled off the side of the road here, after explaining about the deer, the cow and now the moose that just tried to mount the front end of my mini, I was so distraught, can you blame me for calling my buddies to have them brings me a few beers to calm my nerves while I waited for you...... they couldn't stay any longer with me and they took the bottles home to be recycled!!!!! What a week!!!! What is my poor insurance agent gonna say now???

 

I don't think "D" (the crate falling off the truck) would be an "at-fault" accident. Insurance companies usually treat objects in the road differently depending on whether they're moving or not. (e.g. you should be able to avoid a mattress lying in the middle of a road, but if a wheel comes off of a semi-trailer and bounces/rolls into you, they won't hold that against you).

I think "C" would be "at fault", though. Had you hit the cow in the road, you'd probably be okay, insurance-wise, but by choosing to maneuver to avoid it, you're taking responsibility for whatever happens afterwards. (Not that I would recommend plowing into the car as the safest course of action).

 

Aren't some of these state dependent? At least in WI, I think all are true...

 

I purposely used scenarios that are very generic.

The key to your post is the word "think".

 

A and E.

 

Okay, here's your answer to this version of What Do You Know.

Drum roll, please.... thanks.....

The answer is: C (and only C).C is correct because you did not strike the animal. Had you struck the cow first, and then hit the tree, the damages would have been paid under comp. So, moral of the story: Always hit the cow. Just kidding, cows are huge and avoiding them might be a smart move, even if it does mean you're risking an at-fault accident.

Okay, why the others are not consider to be at-fault accidents:

A. As mentioned, striking an animal is a comprehensive claim. The fact that you were driving at night without your lights... doesn't make it an at-fault accident. Now... if you've involved in a collision with another car at night without your lights on, you're very likely to be considered at fault, regardless of other circumstances surrounding the accident. But in this case, stupidity is not a factor.

B. If you had damaged any other part of the vehicle after hitting a pothole, yes, it would be an at-fault accident. But... your auto policy doesn't cover a claim for a tire only. That's why you have Road Hazard insurance from the tire store. So, we're not paying for the tire but you're not considered at fault. Fair enough ?

D. Scott hit this one on the head. If you head a stationary object in the road, you are at fault. But given this crate had just fallen out of the truck and still moving, we feel you probably had no chance to avoid it. We'll pay it as a comp claim and go after the truck driver to get our payment back.

E. You had a bad night. Hit a moose (yuck, what a mess) AND got a DUI. That sucks. But hey, you're not at fault for hitting the moose. The DUI does not change this from being a comp claim.

 

UM should kick in here - damn sure the Cow did not have the legal ins to be on the road lol