Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Let's assume that insurance companies don't care much about the environment when pricing your risk as a driver. They do care about liability. Carpooling increases liability risk. You get in a wreck with a fare or three in your little sedan and you could be looking at a massive increase in payouts for that driver's bad luck. That you are trying to maximize your utilization and occupancy means you are not enabling the insurance company to assess (and price) your risk appropriately. Their service is priced based on your honest divulging (and their industry resourced info) of driving habits. There are assumptions of number of riders for commuter miles.

So, they could deny coverage based on the details of your policy and the facts of the situation. Read carefully. Interpret broadly. When investigating the claims, they will inquire about the affiliations of the riders in the vehicle. I can imagine an Uber driver, with their riders holding their necks, running around saying, "When you talk to my insurance adjuster about this, I need you to lie or we all get nothing."

That would then be insurance fraud at a whole other level.

Insurance companies have been at policy fraud and claim denial for as long as auto insurance has been available.

Given odd situations with large payouts at stake, we'll be reading about subpoenas for user info from Uber or telecoms at some point. The meta-data of your fare(s) could be pretty damning.

Uber seems that it is not being responsible to its drivers or customers in this regard. Uber will feasibly need to not only buy a fleet of their own cars, they'll have to backstop claims for their drivers. They'll be a regular OLD taxi company with an app.

Oh wait... they are already doing this: http://blog.uber.com/uberXridesharinginsurance

Their spin on this is interesting. I'd like to see feedback from a couple carriers.

Oh, we have that too... http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2013/11/14/who-pays-when-ride-...

[quote]In a filing with the California Public Utilities Commission in 2012, the Personal Insurance Federation of California, an industry group made up of State Farm, Farmers, Progressive, Allstate, Liberty Mutual, Mercury and Nationwide, said it asked its members to determine how they would treat liability claims in ride-service accidents.

    In response to the Commission’s inquiries, we surveyed our members regarding coverage issues in the above described situations. It appears that the industry standard for personal auto insurance policy contracts is to exempt from insurance coverage claims involving vehicles used for transporting passengers for a charge. Thus, in situations where a vehicle is insured as a private vehicle and is used to transport passengers for a fee, no insurance coverage would exist…
In a press release after the CPUC ruling, the Association of California Insurance Companies, a trade association and lobbying group, said, “Both drivers and riders must understand that an accident in a ride-sharing vehicle will not be covered under a personal auto insurance policy.”[/quote]



>In response to the Commission’s inquiries, we surveyed our members regarding coverage issues in the above described situations. It appears that the industry standard for personal auto insurance policy contracts is to exempt from insurance coverage claims involving vehicles used for transporting passengers for a charge. Thus, in situations where a vehicle is insured as a private vehicle and is used to transport passengers for a fee, no insurance coverage would exist…

and now grand entry of a police doing traffic stop on a UberX/Lyft car with a fare - no coverage at that moment , i.e. driving without insurance....


hey pistle, quote doesn't work on hn

what does, on a mac, is

   pbpaste | fold -s -w 77 | sed "s/^/   /" | pbcopy
that's 3 spaces in the sed command




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: