# To report or not to report working Uber with your vehicle insurance company that is the question



## IEdriver (Aug 25, 2014)

YouTube
"Will your insurance drop you if you drive for uber"


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

No reason to. When you're driving a rider, you're covered under Uber's policy as primary. When you're just driving around with the app on, you're not doing anything that is excluded by a personal auto policy.

<---instance adjuster by day


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> When you're just driving around with the app on, you're not doing anything that is excluded by a personal auto policy.


Are you serious ? You are driving additional miles to your personal usage in order to get a paid trip. Why do you think that the California legislature and many other jurisdictions are asking that the TCNs provide so-called gap insurance ?

You have come out of the closet now as being an Uber "Brand Ambassador". That does not give you the right to also mislead people in this forum. You can do it in the streets while you are paid to do so by Uber, but not here.


----------



## IEdriver (Aug 25, 2014)

uberdriver said:


> Are you serious ? You are driving additional miles to your personal usage in order to get a paid trip. Why do you think that the California legislature and many other jurisdictions are asking that the TCNs provide so-called gap insurance ?
> 
> You have come out of the closet now as being an Uber "Brand Ambassador". That does not give you the right to also mislead people in this forum. You can do it in the streets while you are paid to do so by Uber, but not here.


You truly are a ****ing idiot if you look at the first comment of this thread
It clearly shows you tube. (Meaning go and ****ing search YouTube) and type in "Will your insurance drop you if you drive for uber"


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

uberdriver said:


> Are you serious ? You are driving additional miles to your personal usage in order to get a paid trip. Why do you think that the California legislature and many other jurisdictions are asking that the TCNs provide so-called gap insurance ?
> 
> You have come out of the closet now as being an Uber "Brand Ambassador". That does not give you the right to also mislead people in this forum. You can do it in the streets while you are paid to do so by Uber, but not here.


I meant when you have the app on but not in the process of picking someone up. Your personal auto policy states that coverage is excluded when in the process of transporting people or goods in exchange for money. When you don't have a ride request, you aren't transporting anyone or anything for money, you're just driving around in hopes of doing so. Note that once you accept a trip, Uber's policy becomes primary, so that covers all scenarios.

This is my interpretation based 100% on my insurance background and has absolutely nothing to do with any affiliation with Uber.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> I meant when you have the app on but not in the process of picking someone up. Your personal auto policy states that coverage is excluded when in the process of transporting people or goods in exchange for money. When you don't have a ride request, you aren't transporting anyone or anything for money, you're just driving around in hopes of doing so. Note that once you accept a trip, Uber's policy becomes primary, so that covers all scenarios.
> 
> This is my interpretation based 100% on my insurance background and has absolutely nothing to do with any affiliation with Uber.


I am sorry, but if you weren't in an indefensible position of conflict of interest since you are being paid by Uber specifically to convince people that using Uber's services is "great", you could be considered naïve or may be not smart enough to understand. But given that you are in such a conflict of interest position, I can only assume that you are misleading on purpose.


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

*Nothing* I do or say on this forum is at Uber's direction or approval. An ambassador gets new rider signups, and I guess according to yesterday's news, recruits Lyft drivers too. I'm here on my own accord, and probably shouldn't even be doing so, to be honest.

Now please, since you're an insurance expert, tell me how my coverage analysis is wrong.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> *Nothing* I do or say on this forum is at Uber's direction or approval. An ambassador gets new rider signups, and I guess according to yesterday's news, recruits Lyft drivers too. I'm here on my own accord, and probably shouldn't even be doing so, to be honest.
> 
> Now please, since you're an insurance expert, tell me how my coverage analysis is wrong.


You sound like if you don't even understand what a conflict of interest position is. You may not be saying things scripted or approved by Uber, but you are saying things on this board that contribute to line up your own pockets as Uber's Brand Ambassador.

I am not sure it makes sense to waste more time trying to make you understand why a regular personal insurance policy will not cover you in an accident if the company knows that at the time of the accident you were driving looking for pings. I will just say it one more time: You are driving for a commercial purpose. That is not what the policy rating was based on. It is the same as declaring when the policy is rated that you only have older drivers in your household and then having your 17 year old son, that lives permanently in your home, at the wheel at the moment of the accident.


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

If you don't have a rider or are on the way to get a rider, then you *aren't* driving for a commercial purpose any more than someone driving to the office is. This is very clear.

EDIT: I won't dispute that an insurer wouldn't drop you for such an activity because as you said, that's not how the policy wad rated. The reason that they'd want to drop you is because of that additional risk exposure. If it was excluded, they wouldn't care, since they would be getting your money in exchange for having to provide nothing in return.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> If you don't have a rider or are on the way to get a rider, then you *aren't* driving for a commercial purpose any more than someone driving to the office is. This is very clear.


What is clear is the opposite. You are saying that if you are on the way to pick up a rider you aren't driving for a commercial purpose because you don't have a passenger inside your car at that precise moment. That is like saying that an ambulance driver's is doing his personal driving when he is on his way to pick up a 911 call. From what is the purpose of the driving, personal vs. commercial, it is no different from an insurance coverage point of view.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> EDIT: I won't dispute that an insurer wouldn't drop you for such an activity because as you said, that's not how the policy wad rated. The reason that they'd want to drop you is because of that additional risk exposure. If it was excluded, they wouldn't care, since they would be getting your money in exchange for having to provide nothing in return.


Your logic is flawed (or the money that Uber pays you to promote their business by misleading people is quite good).

The fact that they would drop you is not because they would have to cover an accident even if they could prove that you were doing Uber business. The reason they would drop you is because they know that there would be a significantly increased risk of you getting into an accident, although in many cases they could not prove (or would not even know) that you were doing Uber driving. So the additional and uncompensated risk exposure is real, but it is in the case that the driver is doing Uber business and the company is not able to demonstrate it or even know about it.


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

uberdriver said:


> What is clear is the opposite. You are saying that if you are on the way to pick up a rider you aren't driving for a commercial purpose because you don't have a passenger inside your car at that precise moment. That is like saying that an ambulance driver's is doing his personal driving when he is on his way to pick up a 911 call. From a purpose of the driving, personal vs. commercial, it is no different from an insurance coverage point of view.


That's not what I'm saying. If you're on your way to pick up a passenger, then yes, you are driving for a commercial purpose. When you're driving as a response to a ping, Uber's insurance is primary. This isn't being disputed by either of us.

I'm saying that if you have the app on, and are not doing anything more than driving around hoping for a ping, that's not for commercial purposes.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> If you don't have a rider *or are on the way to get a rider*, then you *aren't* driving for a commercial purpose any more than someone driving to the office is. This is very clear.





Sean O'Gorman said:


> That's not what I'm saying.


Do you know how to read ? At this point all what I am going to say is that I am surprised that Uber, known for its quality management, recruited such a brain-dead person like you to be on their payroll as a Brand Ambassador to propagate falsehoods. Your senseless postings on this thread above clearly demonstrate that you are really not up to standards for that job.


----------



## IEdriver (Aug 25, 2014)

How's posting falsehoods..??


----------



## IEdriver (Aug 25, 2014)

My original post when I created this thread. Was simply should one report driving Uber to their insurance company or not you two gentlemen went on a ****ing tangent trying to discredit one another's views


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> I meant when you have the app on but not in the process of picking someone up. Your personal auto policy states that coverage is excluded when in the process of transporting people or goods in exchange for money. When you don't have a ride request, you aren't transporting anyone or anything for money, you're just driving around in hopes of doing so. Note that once you accept a trip, Uber's policy becomes primary, so that covers all scenarios.
> 
> This is my interpretation based 100% on my insurance background and has absolutely nothing to do with any affiliation with Uber.


That is so BS! Personal Auto Insurance Policies are priced for drivers personal use of the car. Personal use is usually ~12000 miles a year. How many miles are Ride-sharing driving in a year 30000 - 40000 - 50000, and most of those miles are during the gap period. This argument of yours that a drivers personal policy should/would cover is just a way to shift a cost of ride-sharing onto the pool of personal policy holders.

AZ ride-sharing bill was vetoed by Gov Brewer mainly because it didn't require App On Primary coverage. CO Law requires App On Primary coverage starting Jan 15. In CA 2293 will be passed and enacted into law!
These ride-sharing doublespeak is just unbelievable!


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

OK, look at it this way: I buy state minimum insurance, then decide to get wasted and turn on the Uber driver app for my drive home, with no intention of accepting rides. You think that counts as commercial use of my personal vehicle? *I'm not doing anything within the scope of my job.*


----------



## ElectroFuzz (Jun 10, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> OK, look at it this way: I buy state minimum insurance, then decide to get wasted and turn on the Uber driver app for my drive home, with no intention of accepting rides. You think that counts as commercial use of my personal vehicle? *I'm not doing anything within the scope of my job.*


So you are driving wasted... ?

OK seriously for those who are naive.
Until Uber legal status is 100% settled in your state
if you call your insurance they will most likely drop you.
This is the current reality.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Sean O'Gorman said:


> OK, look at it this way: I buy state minimum insurance, then decide to get wasted and turn on the Uber driver app for my drive home, with no intention of accepting rides. You think that counts as commercial use of my personal vehicle? *I'm not doing anything within the scope of my job.*


That is SOO DARN DISINGENUOUS, Sean! Are you, and 50,000+ Sean's gonna do that 5-6 days a week for 30,000+ miles each year?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

ElectroFuzz said:


> So you are driving wasted... ?
> 
> OK seriously for those who are naive.
> Until Uber legal status is 100% settled in your state
> ...


No they wouldn't drop Sean for informing them about ride-sharing. They'd just put a little note on his policy saying "DENY ALL CLAIMS. RIDESHARE DRIVER. NON RENEWABLE POLICY." Of course why would they wanna cancel his policy when they can just collect his premiums and not pay a dime in claims!


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

So much for this debate...

http://venturebeat.com/2014/08/27/uber-lyft-agree-to-insure-drivers-in-between-rides-in-california/


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

ElectroFuzz said:


> So you are driving wasted... ?
> 
> OK seriously for those who are naive.
> Until Uber legal status is 100% settled in your state
> ...


Well said.

As the Geico phone rep said (and she is not the ultimate company authority on it, that would be somebody at the policy setting level of Geico), they may offer you an alternative to being dropped. That is taking a commercial business insurance, which would rate the policy for what you are doing, offering livery services. That may cost you 5-10 times what your regular policy costs. That is very sensical, if you pay to them the appropriate premium for the risks that they are covering, they will be happy to have your business. But if they can prove that you were trying to have those higher risks under a much cheaper personal auto policy, they will not pay, and they will be within the law and reason.

BTW, it seems that you are not an Uber Brand Ambassador, like the other gentleman had to confess he was in another thread.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> That is SOO DARN DISINGENUOUS, Sean! Are you, and 50,000+ Sean's gonna do that 5-6 days a week for 30,000+ miles each year?


You are right. It is not only darn disingenuous but also highly unethical. Sean had to confess (in another thread) that he is indeed on Uber's payroll as a Brand Ambassador, i.e. his paid job is to convince people that Uber is great. So whatever he is posting here is tainted, if not just utterly wrong, by his compromised position.


----------



## uberdriver (Aug 4, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> So much for this debate...
> 
> http://venturebeat.com/2014/08/27/uber-lyft-agree-to-insure-drivers-in-between-rides-in-california/


Thanks, it is very interesting how this debate about AB 2293 finally turned out. As reported in the article, Uber first publicly claimed that a driver's personal insurance provided enough coverage when the driver was not actively traveling to pick up and drop off passengers. What that was creating was that drivers were unprotected by any type of insurance if they had an accident while waiting for pings with their app on and their personal insurance could prove that fact. Their car, homes and all their personal assets were at risk. Of course now Uber changes their line 180 degrees, as is typical in doublespeak.


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

uberdriver said:


> Thanks, it is very interesting how this debate about AB 2293 finally turned out. As reported in the article, Uber first publicly claimed that a driver's personal insurance provided enough coverage when the driver was not actively traveling to pick up and drop off passengers. What that was implying was that drivers were unprotected by any type of insurance if they had an accident while waiting for pings with their app on and their personal insurance could prove that fact. Their car, homes and all their personal assets were at risk. Of course now Uber changes their line 180 degrees, as is typical in doublespeak.


I call what Uber says and how it says it as UberSpeak!


----------



## David Madrid (Aug 11, 2014)

uberdriver said:


> Your logic is flawed (or the money that Uber pays you to promote their business by misleading people is quite good).
> 
> The fact that they would drop you is not because they would have to cover an accident even if they could prove that you were doing Uber business. The reason they would drop you is because they know that there would be a significantly increased risk of you getting into an accident, although in many cases they could not prove (or would not even know) that you were doing Uber driving. So the additional and uncompensated risk exposure is real, but it is in the case that the driver is doing Uber business and the company is not able to demonstrate it or even know about it.


It may be flawed you but not to a insurance company and that's all that matters.


----------



## Jeff212 (Aug 1, 2014)

Very simple is your insurance premium is based on miles you drive per year, if you drive more miles per year because you are doing ride share, then in the event of a claim they will see the mileage of your vehicle and if it is much higher then what you stated at the time of policy start.... You have a problem..... Of course if you are honest about the miles you will be driving, you'll have higher rates but will not have the problem above..... Just in my few instances of talking with other drivers.... They did not give their insurance company the updated miles they would be driving..... When I notified mine, it did raise my rates.....


----------



## Sean O'Gorman (Apr 17, 2014)

uberdriver said:


> You are right. It is not only darn disingenuous but also highly unethical. Sean had to confess (in another thread) that he is indeed on Uber's payroll as a Brand Ambassador, i.e. his paid job is to convince people that Uber is great. So whatever he is posting here is tainted, if not just utterly wrong, by his compromised position.


You do realize I've worked a whopping 6 hours in that position, right?

I'm speaking as a know-it-all insurance adjuster in this matter. ;-)


----------



## Oc_DriverX (Apr 29, 2014)

IEdriver said:


> My original post when I created this thread. Was simply should one report driving Uber to their insurance company or not you two gentlemen went on a ****ing tangent trying to discredit one another's views


I think the quick answer is that if you wish to get your personal auto insurance cancelled, then volunteer that to your insurer.


----------



## Oc_DriverX (Apr 29, 2014)

Jeff212 said:


> Very simple is your insurance premium is based on miles you drive per year, if you drive more miles per year because you are doing ride share, then in the event of a claim they will see the mileage of your vehicle and if it is much higher then what you stated at the time of policy start.... You have a problem..... Of course if you are honest about the miles you will be driving, you'll have higher rates but will not have the problem above..... Just in my few instances of talking with other drivers.... They did not give their insurance company the updated miles they would be driving..... When I notified mine, it did raise my rates.....


And ironically, the extra miles for which your rates were raised are miles that they won't insure anyway!


----------

