Sunday, December 4, 2022
HomeInsuranceInsurance coverage protection Q&A: Who can drive a deceased policyholder's automotive?

Insurance coverage protection Q&A: Who can drive a deceased policyholder’s automotive?


In Maryland Casualty Co. v. Martinez, the insured had died and the brother-in-law of the insured’s caretaker was driving the automobile on the time of an accident. The courtroom discovered that the insurer didn’t have to offer a protection since neither the surviving partner nor the authorized consultant had been driving the automobile on the time of loss. (Credit score: Kzenon/Shutterstock.com)

We had an insured move away and his son continued paying his auto insurance coverage premium and permitting his grandson to drive the one listed auto on this coverage. Do you see any protection issues with this? Any grounds for denial?

— Ohio Subscriber

Upon the dying of the insured, the shape states that protection transfers to the surviving partner if that partner is a resident of the family on the time of dying, or the authorized consultant of the deceased as if a named insured.

For the authorized consultant, protection applies with respect to the consultant’s obligation to keep up or use “your coated auto.” What precisely is the duty to keep up or use the automobile is the query. Nevertheless, courts are clear that protection extends to the authorized consultant or surviving partner solely.

In Maryland Casualty Co. v. Martinez, the insured had died and the brother-in-law of the insured’s caretaker was driving the automobile on the time of an accident. The courtroom discovered that the insurer didn’t have to offer a protection since neither the surviving partner nor the authorized consultant had been driving the automobile on the time of loss.

Grinnell Choose Ins. Co. v. Cont’l W. Ins. Co., is analogous: The daughter of the deceased insured allowed an uninsured individual to drive the automobile and that individual had an accident. The coverage provisions acknowledged that protection prolonged to a surviving partner or a authorized consultant; the uninsured driver was neither. The courtroom discovered that there was nobody certified on this state of affairs to obtain the extension of protection.

In Oroian v. Allstate Ins. Co., the non-public consultant allowed one other individual to make use of the deceased’s automobile; the driving force had an accident within the automobile. The courtroom affirmed the decrease courtroom’s place and held that for the reason that driver was utilizing the automobile for private and never estate-related functions, that he was not entitled to protection.

Except the grandson has been appointed authorized consultant of the property, I don’t see any protection for the grandson on this state of affairs.

Associated: 



Supply hyperlink

RELATED ARTICLES

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular

Recent Comments