Car Accident at a Charity Event

[flyinlynx]

My question involves independent contractors in the state of: CALIFORNIA

I funded a large charity event. The manager of the event, the one who produced it for me, hired several workers, friends of hers, to help with carrying out the event. One of the duties involved renting a large moving truck. I paid for it. Bob signed for it (but paperwork allows anyone in my group of workers to drive). Both Bob and George drove it. George, in last minute rushing and haste, hit Bob's car, causing damage to Bob's car but not the truck. $2500 worth.

Who is responsible for the damage?

I have no contractual connection to the employee. I believe one would consider him an IC, as we have no paperwork to show either way. Typically, in events like this, I just pay the employees, have them fill out W-9s, etc and then they get 1099'd. I had insurance for the truck and for the event, should something go wrong, but it has a huge deductible: $5000.

The workers did not call the police. They didn't tell the rental company of the accident. They didn't exchange insurance cards. But I saw the damage to verify it. George is trying to get me to pay for it, saying he was working and therefore it is on me.

[FullAuto]

When you loan someone your car, you loan them your insurance. If you rent a car, you can pay extra for the rental company's insurance, or use your own collision coverage. You choose to pay for the rental company's insurance. Since the truck was rented by you, you are responsible for it. So if you rent the truck, allow someone else to drive it and they wreck it, it goes against the truck which you are responsible for. Bob should make the claim against the coverage you purchased. Your insurance company will likely deny the claim since you purchased the optional insurance and it would pay first. Employees or not, working or not, has nothing to do with it. At least that's the way it would work here. Maybe it's different in the Republic of Kalifornia.

Insurance coverage with a $5k deductible? That's awesome. LOL

[flyinlynx]

You have no idea what you're talking about. "If you loan someone your car, you loan them your insurance?" Wow. I stopped reading right there buddy.

[PTPD22]

You have no idea what you're talking about. "If you loan someone your car, you loan them your insurance?" Wow. I stopped reading right there buddy.

shoulda kept reading...because he absolutely knows what he is talking about.

[Mr. Knowitall]

[QUOTE=flyinlynx;609247]I funded a large charity event. The manager of the event, the one who produced it for me, hired several workers, friends of hers, to help with carrying out the event....]
So the manager of the event, who was not your agent or employee, hired these people? Or is it that your manger, in her capacity as your agent or employee, hired these people?

I have no contractual connection to the employee. I believe one would consider him an IC, as we have no paperwork to show either way. Typically, in events like this, I just pay the employees, have them fill out W-9s, etc and then they get 1099'd.

First, you keep calling these people "employees". Who employed them? Second, the question of whether they are independent contractors or employees does not depend upon how you pay them - it depends upon 24 different elements (see here, Attachment 1). Third, if you were the one paying them it would follow inexorably that the were working for you - that's a contractual relationship.

One of the duties involved renting a large moving truck. I paid for it. Bob signed for it (but paperwork allows anyone in my group of workers to drive). Both Bob and George drove it. George, in last minute rushing and haste, hit Bob's car, causing damage to Bob's car but not the truck. $2500 worth.

You got into a bit of a snit over the discussion of insurance, so try to keep your head, okay?

There are a number of ways that somebody can pursue an employer of either an employee or independent contractor for damages based upon the negligence of their employee or independent contractor. If there's an employer-employee relationship it's usually pretty easy - you argue respondeat superior, an employer is liable for the negligence of his employees as they carry out their job duties. But even if not (or in addition) it's possible to claim negligent hiring (did you do a driving record check before turning the truck keys over to the guy - and if you had, what would you have found), negligent retention (problems arose after hiring that caused or should have caused you to terminate the employee or stop him from driving), negligent supervision, negligent entrustment of a motor vehicle (under these circumstances, a similar theory to negligent hiring)....

None of that would remove George's liability for his own negligence, but if it comes down to litigation you can expect that you'll be along for the ride.

Of peripheral interest, California (like a number of other states) has an owner liability statute,

Every owner of a motor vehicle is liable and responsible for death or injury to person or property resulting from a negligent or wrongful act or omission in the operation of the motor vehicle, in the business of the owner or otherwise, by any person using or operating the same with the permission, express or implied, of the owner.

But here, you weren't the owner and the rental agency is off the hook pursuant to its lack of agency (see VC Sec. 17151).

The workers did not call the police. They didn't tell the rental company of the accident. They didn't exchange insurance cards. But I saw the damage to verify it. George is trying to get me to pay for it, saying he was working and therefore it is on me.

George is asking you to pay the money, which suggests that Bob is asking him to pay the money. Has Bob approached you? (I can't help but wonder.... did anybody else see what happened? Because if not, a deeply cynical part of me wonders if Bob hit his own car.)

[flyinlynx]

#1) No, Bob did not hit his own car. He got hit. He's unequivocally telling the truth.

#2) Yes, Bob has approached me. He's a meek, nice person and avoids conflict. So I believe him and know that as soon as George gets paid (which I have yet to do and don't know if I will), George will simply never look back.

#3) The classification on the link you gave is grey, it's straight down the middle, though for the sake of argument I'll assume the worst: that he is an employee.

#4) Janine, the woman I had manage them, worked for free. She was simply someone I asked to do it. She was totally free. She used my CC on the truck rental though. Thus, your question about working for me, though she did accomplish everything we set out to do, has no evidence of contractual agreement or hiring or pay. There is simply no connection other than a few phone calls and emails.

Moreover, my connection to Bob is nonexistent. I spoke only a few words to him, never hiring, never paying (yet), never signing anything.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Your connection to Bob is "nonexistent" except for the fact that he was quite obviously your agent or employee, he signed for the truck you rented, you owe him compensation for the work he performed....

If you're asking "What happens if I lie", I really don't want to go there.

[flyinlynx]

Mr. Knowitall, you are not some omniscient law presence, you're a hack on a forum with a modicum of law knowledge who parades around showboating and offering contrary advice, form fitted to being anti-helpful and anti-hopeful, and looking for one thing: to be revered. Well you win, Buster. You're the go-to paralegal on a law forum. Congrats. You must be a power-starved cop.

[Mr. Knowitall]

Yet another person throwing a temper tantrum when confronted with the facts.

Sorry that I didn't make you happy by condoning your plan to lie.

You've established pretty clearly the essence of your character. Sorry, but when somebody of your character calls me names it really doesn't hurt.

[PTPD22]

Welcome to the "power-starved cop" fraternity.