Free Case Evaluation by a Local Lawyer!
Enter Zipcode or for Immediate Assistance call (888) 428-7281
Have a general legal question? Click hereAsk a Local Attorney. 100% Anonymous. Free Answers.
Or for Immediate Assistance call (888) 428-7281
Free Case Evaluation by a Local Lawyer: Click here
Law Offices of Kenneth Wincorn P.C. | Kenneth Wincorn
The answer depends on who caused the accident.
Answer Applies to: Texas
Replied: 11/29/2011
West law Office | Russell West
The owner of the car is generally liable unless you did not have permission to drive the car. If they are uninsured they can be sued in a civil matter and you could also be named in the suit.
Answer Applies to: Washington
Replied: 11/23/2011
David F. Stoddard | David F. Stoddard
I do not believe the car owner would be liable unless they could prove that the owner was negligent in letting the other driver borrow the car. To prove this, you would have to present evidence that the owner knew the driver was a dangerous driver. The highway department might suspend the owner's drivers license until any damage claim is settled. I know they do this if you are the driver, but they may do it even if you are just the owner because you are supposed to have insurance on your car.
Answer Applies to: South Carolina
Replied: 11/23/2011
Wilson & Hajek, LLC | Eddie W. Wilson
There is a need for negligent entrustment to be proven. That means the person entrusted with the car was not physically nor mentally capable of driving and the owner knew this at the time of entrustment.
Answer Applies to: Virginia
Replied: 11/23/2011
Dwyer, Black & Lyle, LLP | Kevin Habberfield
Yes, V&T section 388. Google it.
Answer Applies to: New York
Replied: 11/23/2011
Paul Whitfield and Associates P.A. | Paul L. Whitfield
If the owner allowed the use he is liable along with the driver.
Answer Applies to: North Carolina
Replied: 11/23/2011
Moody Jones Ingino & Morehead | Charles A. Morehead III
Yes, In Florida, the owner is liable under the Dangerous Instrumentality doctrine.
Answer Applies to: Florida
Replied: 11/21/2011
Broad Law Firm, LLC | Donald K. Broad
In Indiana, the owner of the vehicle can possibly be liable, but you would have to prove a negligent entrustment. You should seek the advice of a local personal injury attorney to be certain.
Answer Applies to: Indiana
Replied: 2/17/2012
Wilson & Hajek,LLC, a personal injury law firm | Francis Hajek
The owner may or may not be personally liable depending on the facts of the case. However, your insurance covers the car accident. As ot he owner, it depends on whether he or she had knowledge that the person to whom the car was lent was unlicensed.
Answer Applies to: Virginia
Replied: 11/21/2011
The Law Offices of Paul A. Samakow, P.C. | Paul A. Samakow
Yes, possibly. If the owner of the car that was used was aware that the individual did not have a license, then there may be some responsibility on the part of the owner. I would contact an attorney.
Answer Applies to: Virginia
Replied: 11/21/2011
Kelaher Law Offices, P.A. | James P Kelaher
The owner of a car is responsible for any damage that car does if the owner gave the driver permission to use it.
Answer Applies to: Florida
Replied: 11/21/2011
Law Office of Jared Altman | Jared Altman
Yes, if the owner gave the operator permission to use the car.
Answer Applies to: New York
Replied: 11/21/2011
Paris Blank LLP | Irving M Blank
Only if they knew the driver was unlicensed and the car uninsured. Your problem would then be trying to collect from the owner.
Answer Applies to: Virginia
Replied: 11/21/2011
Lombardi Law Firm | Steve Lombardi
Yes, at least in Iowa they can be held liable. The owner can be liable because whether a person has a license or doesn't have a license isn't relevant. The issue that are relevant are knowledge and consent. Did the owner give the person consent? I noticed you danced around this issue so I'm going to assume you did give consent.
Answer Applies to: Iowa
Replied: 11/21/2011
The Kelly Law Firm, P.C. | L. Todd Kelly
Yes, but there are exceptions.
Answer Applies to: Texas
Replied: 11/19/2011
Andrew T. Velonis, P.C. | Andrew Velonis
Yes, if the driver was operating the car with the owner's permission.
Answer Applies to: New York
Replied: 11/18/2011
Counard & Heilmann Law Office | Michael Heilmann
Yes, MI has a statute that holds the owner of a vehicle responsible for the actions of a driver of that vehicle. Don't drive without insurance.
Answer Applies to: Michigan
Replied: 11/18/2011
R. D. Kelly Law Firm, P.L.L.C. | Robert Kelly
Negligence usually involves failure to be as careful as a reasonably prudent person would have been. "A person entrusting a vehicle to another may be liable under a theory of negligent entrustment only if that person knew, or should have known in the exercise of ordinary care, that the person to whom the vehicle was entrusted is reckless, heedless, or incompetent".
Answer Applies to: Washington
Replied: 11/18/2011
Kirshner & Groff | Richard M. Kirshner
If he was at fault for the accident.
Answer Applies to: Florida
Replied: 11/18/2011
Bulman Law Associates PLLC Injury Law Firm | Thomas Bulman
No. Even if they were, with no insurance, you would not be able to collect money from the deadbeat.
Answer Applies to: Montana
Replied: 11/18/2011
The Law Office of Harry E. Hudson, Jr. | Harry E. Hudson, Jr.
Lack of insurance does not create liability and render the person w/o insurance liable for damages. You do n0t provide any information for one to make a comment about liability.
Answer Applies to: California
Replied: 11/18/2011
Law Office of Garrett S. Handy | Garrett S. Handy
Perhaps. The owner of the car may be found liable for Negligent Entrustment meaning the owner should have known better than to let an unlicensed/uninsured person drive his/her car. Whether or not the owner is liable under a theory of negligent entrustment depends on several factors. In a case like this, it is almost always advisable to just file an uninsured motorist claim with your own insurance company.
Answer Applies to: Utah
Replied: 11/18/2011
Holzer Edwards | Kurt Holzer
In Idaho the answer to that is yes, but only up to the minimum limits of insurance or the insurance the owner has. If the owner was independently negligent in entrusting the car to the driver and causing the collision, the owner might be directly responsible.
Answer Applies to: Idaho
Replied: 11/18/2011
Law Offices of Michael Stephenson | Michael Stephenson
Yes, an owner of a vehicle is always potentially liable if the vehicle is involved in a collision. However, more facts as to the relationship between the owner and the driver are needed to give a firm answer in your case.
Answer Applies to: California
Replied: 11/18/2011
Carter Boyle LLC | Nelson Boyle
The driver who caused the accident could receive a citation. The owner of the vehicle and the driver both could be liable for injury to others or damage to property. If the vehicle was insured, that insurance will be primary. Also, if anyone had an uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage, or lived in the house of someone that had that coverage, then that policy might cover the injuries.
Answer Applies to: Colorado
Replied: 11/18/2011
Adler Law Group, LLC | Lawrence Adler
If the person your referring to caused the accident, the owner of the car is equally responsible unless the driver was not authorized and without permission to use the car.
Answer Applies to: Connecticut
Replied: 11/18/2011
Klisz Law Office, PLLC | Timothy J. Klisz
Yes, an owner is liable under permissive use.
Answer Applies to: Michigan
Replied: 11/18/2011
