Accident During a Test Drive

[Ladyluck]

TEXAS

A person is considering purchasing (assuming notes) on another individual's vehicle. They take the vehicle out for a test drive. While test driving the vehicle they get involved in a fender-bender where they are at fault. They learn after the fact that the owner of the vehicle has let the insurance lapse.

Who is reponsible for paying for the damages to the other vehicle involved in the accident - the person test-driving the vehicle or the actual owner of the vehicle?

Also, the person test-driving the vehicle is cited for having no insurance coverage. Should the owner who let the coverage lapse pay the fine or the one test-driving?

[aaron]

If the person doing the test drive had her own insurance policy, she may be able to get coverage for the accident. Also, if the circumstances are explained to a prosecutor, it may be possible to get the "no insurance" citation issued to the test driver dismissed.

[Ladyluck]

The person driving did not have an insurance policy in her name. She had been driving a company vehicle covered by the company's insurance. She left that job so of course no longer had the company vehicle. This was why she was test driving this one as she was in need of a vehicle.

[Ladyluck]

I appreciate your reply but my question is still not answered. The person test- driving did not have her own insurance policy as stated above because she had been driving a company vehicle covered by their insurance.

She was test driving this vehicle for the purpose of purchasing a personal vehicle as she no longer had use of the company vehicle. She was under the impression that the vehicle was insured.

The question is: By law who is responsible for the damages in this situation,
the owner of the vehicle or the person test-driving the vehicle.. It was my understanding that the owner of the vehicle had to maintain financial responsibility. The insurance company for the person driving the other car involved in the accident actually repaired the damages on that vehicle as the person had Uninsured Motorist protection. However, now that insurance company is going after the "Test-Driver" for damages to the tune of $4000 and sending basically threatening correspondence stating they are going to take legal action which would result in the suspension of their driver's license.

We need to know 1. Can they do this? 2. By law who is reponsible for these damages? 3. What is the course of action here? She does not have $4000 to hand over to that insurance company.

[aaron]

People are responsible for the consequence of their own negligence. She should consult a Texas lawyer to see if she has any technical defenses to the claim.

[blewis]

I don't know about Texas, but in Washington we've got this:

Under Washington law, where the ownership of an automobile is admitted, there arises a presumption that, at the time of the accident, the vehicle was in the possession of the owner, and that the driver was operating it as the agent or servant of the owner. Callen v. Coca Cola Bottling, Inc., 50 Wash. 2d 180, 182, 310 P.2d 236 (1957); Moffitt v. Krueger, 11 Wash. 2d 658, 662, 120 P.2d 512 (1941). If the presumption is unrebutted, the owner is vicariously liable for injuries resulting from the driver's negligence. Here, Wood, the owner of the vehicle, was present at the time of the accident, and Farmers offers no evidence to rebut the presumption that Cornelius was operating the car as Wood's agent.

In this case, Wood had just purchased the car and was allowing Cornelius to drive it. Cornelius was considered Wood's "agent." So, if you were just taking a test drive, would you be considered "the agent or servant of the owner"? That's a question for an attorney (or perhaps a jury).

Barry