Crashed her Dads Garage!

[Sales71]

Well my client is homeowner. His daughter lives with him but has her own insurance with off wall insurance company Safeway ins. She lost control or something in his garage and drove into the wall and damage his house and his car up to 10k of damage. He called me and I told him to file a claim under his daughter policy. Now Safeway is denying the claim and telling him the he is excluded under her policy. But they paid to fix her car...what he can do now?

 

[F150]

why is he excluded, he wasnt the driver

 

[djs]

He's not excluded, her residence is probably. This is typical, you run your car into your own house, its 2 claims, one for the car, one for the house.

Reason is, you can't file a property damage claim against yourself on your cars.

He'll have to file a homeowners claim for the damage to the house. They can, in turn, subrogate back to the car / daughter, but probably won't, since she lives in the house.

Dan

 

[Sales71]

He's not excluded, her residence is probably. This is typical, you run your car into your own house, its 2 claims, one for the car, one for the house.

Reason is, you can't file a property damage claim against yourself on your cars.

He'll have to file a homeowners claim for the damage to the house. They can, in turn, subrogate back to the car / daughter, but probably won't, since she lives in the house.

Dan

Its confusing since she is not the owner of the house the Dad is. Just does not make sense. So your saying the place she lives is excluded if she damage it..how about if it was an apartment building they would not pay to fix that as well??

 

[hesse]

She is a member of the household that is owned by her father so it wont be covered.

like he said here

Reason is, you can't file a property damage claim against yourself on your cars


if she hit an apartment building she lived in its not filing a claim on yourself.

 

[Sales71]

She is a member of the household that is owned by her father so it wont be covered.

like he said here

Reason is, you can't file a property damage claim against yourself on your cars


if she hit an apartment building she lived in its not filing a claim on yourself.

So if the client was to hit his own house lose control of his car and crash into his garage...his home insurance company would not pay and his auto insurance company would not pay as well.

 

[hesse]

If I run into my garage with my car its 2 claims at fault acc on car coll ded and a claim on homeowners. If I run my car into my neighbors house my car property damage liability would fix it.

 

[ToddC]

I tend to agree with Sales. I think Safeway might have screwed up.

Trigger under the daughters auto policy is when she's legally liable. She does not own the home and even if she's living there, she can be legally liable. It's no different then if she's renting or her father owns it. So then we'd need to look at exclusions. I can't think if any that apply... only come close. But I'm betting Safeway denied it thinking just as posted here... that you can't be liable to yourself. Again, she does not own the home and she certainly _can_ be liable for the property damage caused to her parents home. What should make this claim easy to pay by Safeway is that she has her own insurance policy.

My recommendation Sales is that your client speak to a supervisor at her carrier and ask why the claim was denied. If it matches what I mention above then she needs to point out that her father _can_ legally pursue her for payment of the damages. As such, there is a trigger of coverage and they are more then welcome to find an exclusion. If not... pay the claim.

 

[TeePee]

I wonder if she is *automatically* covered under the Dad's policy due to age?How old is the driver?

I have always known this as a *You can't be liable to yourself* situation and again wonder if the daughter's age might have something to do with the denial?

 

[ToddC]

I wonder if she is *automatically* covered under the Dad's policy due to age?How old is the driver?

I have always known this as a *You can't be liable to yourself* situation and again wonder if the daughter's age might have something to do with the denial?

Keep this in mind... Safeway, the daughters insurance, is denying coverage. Some say it's because an insured can't be liable to an insured. It's the daughters liability policy with Safeway. So, using that thought... Safeway would be saying that the daughter cannot be liable to her father. The fathers insurance has nothing to do with this. For the purpose of this claim the father is not an insured under the daughters policy.

To go back to Safe's post... Safeway told the father that was excluded from her policy. I'm guessing but I don't think that is the exact reason for the denial as it does not make sense. We are talking about the daughters liability coverage. It does not make sense to say the father is excluded from her policy... nor would it matter. I tend to think Safeway is actually denying saying that the daughter cannot be liable to the father (as mentioned).