Suing Car Dealership for Negligence for Letting Me Drive Off Lot with No Insurance

[itsjustme]

My question involves court procedures for the state of: TN


A car lot let me buy and drive a car off the lot with no insurance and I was under impression that they had it covered for 30 days.

I got in a accident 2 weeks later and come to find out car lot does not have insurance on car and stated it was warranty only for 30 days.

They told me insurance but I know I will never be able to prove that.

My question is if they fail to help me could I sue them for negligence since they let me drive off the lot with no insurance when its illegal for them to do so as well?

Is there any liability for the dealer for letting you leave without insurance,

[flyingron]

You don't have a whiff of a case here. Once you buy the car, insurance is your concern not there's. You're only required to have liability insurance as far as the law is concerned. I've never heard of a dealer's policy covering you after the sale occurs.

[KeyWestDan]

You have no cause of action. They owed you no duty. There is nothing in the law that will help you.

So I take it the accident was your fault. Otherwise you'd just collect against the other driver.

Now you have to live with your stupidity.

[itsjustme]

That was not my question nopr did you answer my question. I said negligence not for them to cover my car. Also if a dealer says they have insurance on car for 30 days then I dont have to have insurance to drive off the lot.


They should had never let me drive off with no insurance thats negligence

[flyingron]

If you could speak proper English, it might be possible to understand you.
But in any event, the dealer has no duty to insure you or assure you have insurance. There's no negligence here except on your own part.
Your statement that they made an oral statement of insuring the car isn't convincing. They may indeed have had it insured while they still owned it, but that has no bearing once you take possession of it.

[itsjustme]

Spoke to a lawyer and thy said yes we could sue. its illegal to let a person drive off with insurance . Civil lawsuit can fly...

Thats like saying if you let your son drive your car and you know he doesn't have a license and is drunk. HE pounds a young women head on and kills her... Do you think your responsible?Family will sue you for negligence..

[Mr. Knowitall]

That was not my question nopr did you answer my question. I said negligence not for them to cover my car.

You got an answer to that question. No, it's not negligent for them not to cover your car because they have no duty to insure your car. It's your car, and thus it's your obligation to obtain appropriate insurance.

Also if a dealer says they have insurance on car for 30 days then I dont have to have insurance to drive off the lot.

You told us:

They told me insurance but I know I will never be able to prove that.

I have no idea why a car dealer would mislead you on this issue, but given that you admit that you will never be able to prove that they did so the issue is moot. Were you to sue, you would have the burden of proving that they promised you thirty days of insurance coverage, and you state that it would be impossible for you to meet that burden.

[Mr.Skipper]

Spoke to a lawyer and thy said yes we could sue. its illegal to let a person drive off with insurance . Civil lawsuit can fly...

Thats like saying if you let your son drive your car and you know he doesn't have a license and is drunk. HE pounds a young women head on and kills her... Do you think your responsible?Family will sue you for negligence..

Your comparison is wrong. If I let someone drive MY car (1) its my car, I OWN it, and under my CONTROL and possession when I give it too him; (2) the theory is negligent entrustment.

If you financed the car then I'm sure your finance company required you to have insurance on the vehicle in order to purchase it. You're responsible. But the car dealer may have a problem accepting financing and knowing you don't have insurance....

If you paid cash and crashed the car. You're responsible. Once you have possession and control of the car, the status of their insurance coverage won't help you. Unless they sold you a policy there isn't one. Once you take the car under your control, its your responsibility.

Plus their alleged failure to make sure you had insurance or alleged misrepresentation didn't cause your accident/damages, you did when you crashed the car, so you have no consumer protection suit or fraud claim.

Your case will be subject to demurrer and ultimately dismissed for failing to show that they owed you a duty and there is no causation between any misrepresentation or omission.

[jk]

Spoke to a lawyer and thy said yes we could sue. its illegal to let a person drive off with insurance . Civil lawsuit can fly...
.

Ya, best of luck with that. Come on back and let us know how that turns out for ya.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Let's assume that the lawyer can make a plausible claim of negligence. How does the lawyer propose to prove proximate cause - the legal connection between the dealership's negligence and your injury? That is, how would your own negligence in failing to obtain insurance, and your own negligence in crashing the car, not constitute intervening or supervening causes of your injury? I would be very interested in learning the lawyer's theories.