# I really don't get rideshare insurance.



## Ubernic (Apr 24, 2016)

If I was driving normal off the clock, I would not be using the car for business, that would be no different than using my car to and from work in a regular job, so insurance should have no problem covering me there. When I am on the clock for Uber, I am covered by their insurance, so no problem there. Am I missing something here? Why do we need special insurance? Is this just a way for insurance companies to gouge rideshare drivers?


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

Uber/Lyft insurance only covers you while a pax is in your car. Also, they don't cover your car. If you have comprehensible on your own insurance, you can claim through theirs after paying their very-high deductible.


----------



## Ubernic (Apr 24, 2016)

Ben105 said:


> Uber/Lyft insurance only covers you while a pax is in your car. Also, they don't cover your car. If you have comprehensible on your own insurance, you can claim through theirs after paying their very-high deductible.


Ahh, makes sense, basically Uber's insurance is crap.

My insurance was super happy I was doing Uber, the guy was all excited about it. He was excited to tell me how I am covered by them still and nothing needs to change with my policy, it is considered a person leisure activity that is perfectly fine. I adjusted my mileage and that bumped my rate a little, but I needed to add nothing, and they know I rideshare and are fine with it. He said for California there is no gap insurance though, I don't know if that is just through them or something with the state. What that means to me is I need to be extra careful when waiting for a ride, try to park as much as possible, and not drive so much with the app on while waiting for a ride. Other than that I don't see the fuss everyone makes about insurance on these boards.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

Who do you use?


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

Ubernic said:


> Ahh, makes sense, basically Uber's insurance is crap.
> 
> My insurance was super happy I was doing Uber, the guy was all excited about it. He was excited to tell me how I am covered by them still and nothing needs to change with my policy, it is considered a person leisure activity that is perfectly fine. I adjusted my mileage and that bumped my rate a little, but I needed to add nothing, and they know I rideshare and are fine with it. He said for California there is no gap insurance though, I don't know if that is just through them or something with the state. What that means to me is I need to be extra careful when waiting for a ride, try to park as much as possible, and not drive so much with the app on while waiting for a ride. Other than that I don't see the fuss everyone makes about insurance on these boards.


Instead of taking the word of some insurance guy (sales agent, customer rep, claims rep??) I suggest you read your policy thoroughly. Pay special attention to the parts dealing with what is covered and what is not. Also read what is says about driving for hire. California law requires gap insurance for rideshare. So the "fuss" is about leaving yourself hung out to dry in case of an accident, and likely being dropped by your insurer.


----------



## xr650r (Dec 22, 2014)

Most insurence policies state no commercial use of your vehicle for ANYTHING .That smiling sales rep is just lying to get his commission.It is up to you to read the fine print on the policy or find somebody to correctly interpret it for you.Uber insurence is really just to protect Uber from a pax's lawsuit.If you are in an accident where you get separated from your cell phone the Leo's are very good at checking what your cell phone was doing in the few minutes before the accident.And what ever they find will be in the accident report.How much is the car you use for Uber worth?You could end up having to replace it out of pocket.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

So the main risk to insurance companies is in period one where you're online waiting for a ping. You could be driving and get distracted, parked somewhere not optimal, or anything else. Their risk is more with providing you insurance. So they either have to accept the extra risk (not likely), offer an endorsement that pays them a bit more to offset the risk in period 1, or cancel you if they find out. Most insurance companies would like to offer the extra coverage but it is a ***** to get the approvals filed with each state insurance commissioner and takes a long time. So I guarantee there is many companies already in process to offer this in future. It is also expensive to offer new things as it takes lots of behind the scene changes from programming systems, analyzing the risk to find proper rate, alter forms/contracts, train their staff, etc. In 2017 I'm sure there will be multiple options in almost all states.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ubernic said:


> Ahh, makes sense, basically Uber's insurance is crap.
> 
> My insurance was super happy I was doing Uber, the guy was all excited about it. He was excited to tell me how I am covered by them still and nothing needs to change with my policy, it is considered a person leisure activity that is perfectly fine. I adjusted my mileage and that bumped my rate a little, but I needed to add nothing, and they know I rideshare and are fine with it. He said for California there is no gap insurance though, I don't know if that is just through them or something with the state. What that means to me is I need to be extra careful when waiting for a ride, try to park as much as possible, and not drive so much with the app on while waiting for a ride. Other than that I don't see the fuss everyone makes about insurance on these boards.


Your insurance guy was lying. Period.


----------



## Ubernic (Apr 24, 2016)

Lying? Why would he lie when he isn't trying to make a sale, has nothing to gain, was very knowledgeable on rides are insurance and how Uber works? He talked all about how gap insurance works, where the gray areas are with coverage, what I am covered for etc.


----------



## Ubernic (Apr 24, 2016)

Uber says here they insure me in period 1. So I am doing nothing illegal by not having gap insurance.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

Period one is the "gap." You are most likely not covered by your personal auto insurance unless specifically stated in your policy, *in writing.* Uber is covering you for liability if you do not have rideshare or TNC insurance, and your insurer denies a claim. They do not cover injuries you might sustain or damage to your car in period one. Ca law requires Uber/Lyft to provide liability coverage in period one, but with these lower limits. This is "gap insurance."If your insurance guy is telling you there is no gap insurance for California then you are probably not covered by them for any commercial purposes. No one here is saying that you are doing anything illegal. But you may be taking a tremendous financial risk.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

This may be specific to CA. As far as I know, CA has a law that says TNC (Uber or Lyft's) insurance must be primary in all three periods. I don't think it's the same elsewhere.


----------



## ChortlingCrison (Mar 30, 2016)

The txrides is the most knowledgeable when it comes to insurance.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

ChortlingCrison said:


> The txrides is the most knowledgeable when it comes to insurance.


What?


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

Ben105 said:


> What?


He is referring to member Tx rides, a livery operator in Texas. She has posted about insurance issues and her conversations with experts in the industry. Well worth searching out her posts.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

Thanks.


----------



## Rex8976 (Nov 11, 2014)

Bottom line: When you accept a paying fare, regardless of source, your personal insurance is void.

The shell game of "app on, app off" is there simply to mollify those who are happy to believe whatever is convenient for them.

Call your insurance company and have them explain it to you.

Use your real info. I double dog dare ya!


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> This may be specific to CA. As far as I know, CA has a law that says TNC (Uber or Lyft's) insurance must be primary in all three periods. I don't think it's the same elsewhere.


Yeah but in period one I assume it is liability only and won't cover drivers physical damage to his vehicle. In Seattle Uber and Lyft is primary for liability at a reduced limit of 50k in period one. But damage to your vehicle and you're screwed if you don't have gap. Plus 50k isn't crap for liability.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

From what I understand, and I could be wrong, is that physical damage in CA is contingent on you having it on your regular policy. When I was in an accident, I had to show James River that I had collision and comprehensive insurance on my own policy before they would cover it on theirs and only at their deductible.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> From what I understand, and I could be wrong, is that physical damage in CA is contingent on you having it on your regular policy. When I was in an accident, I had to show James River that I had collision and comprehensive insurance on my own policy before they would cover it on theirs and only at their deductible.


That is absolutely correct in periods 2 and 3. However, physical damage is not provided by James River for your vehicle in period 1.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

That is not true in CA. There is a state law. However you must have it on your personal insurance to get it. I know. I was in an accident when a lady hit me in the parking lot.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> That is not true in CA. There is a state law. However you must have it on your personal insurance to get it. I know. I was in an accident when a lady hit me in the parking lot.


You may be right about Cakifornia but from the pic even shown here from Uber shows period 1 to not have contingent physical damage. It only shows in periods 2 and 3.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

I think that graphic is regular Uber rules. I do have GAP insurance, but I didn't at the time of the accident.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> That is not true in CA. There is a state law. However you must have it on your personal insurance to get it. I know. I was in an accident when a lady hit me in the parking lot.


Actually I did further research and found your statement is indeed inaccurate and my initial observation was correct. Uber (James River Insurance) does NOT cover a drivers physical damage in period 1 in California.

https://newsroom.uber.com/insurance-update-for-california-driver-partners/

This is reason they are suggesting drivers get the gap insurance and they specifically are endorsing Farmer's Insurance. That article is very specific on what optional coverages would be included in the gap.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> I think that graphic is regular Uber rules. I do have GAP insurance, but I didn't at the time of the accident.


Then you got lucky. See my new post.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

All they did was confirm that I had it on my personal insurance and I was covered.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> All they did was confirm that I had it on my personal insurance and I was covered.


Then you got lucky somehow. They do not include physical damage coverage in period 1 per the contract and California Law. So though you may be lucky yours was paid (though I'm not sure if you may have been in period 2 or 3) suggesting to people it is included would not be ideal. As we all know Uber is not the company that treats people fairly so if the contract, State Law, and certificate of insurance say it's not covered it is not covered. Period. Your individual and unique claim does not change that fact.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

Reading your own link: "The new California law will require either the TNC, Uber's affiliate Rasier-CA LLC, or the rideshare driver partner to maintain primary third-party liability insurance that provides coverage in the amounts of $50,000 per individual with a total of $100,000 per accident *along with up to $30,000 for property damage during Period 1.*" Bold-facing is my own to emphasize.

It's not a lot of property damage, but it is some. What it also goes on to say is that YOUR OWN PERSONAL INSURANCE cannot be used to protect you while the app is on ever unless it's specifically rideshare insurance and that because of this, any comprehensive and/or collision coverage you have on your personal insurance does not cover you, but as stated above, you have up to $30k for property damage and it also says this applies ONLY to CA because of a new CA law.

And here is the clause under the specific CA law in all of the legalese glory:

(c) The following requirements shall apply to transportation network company insurance from the moment a participating driver logs on to the transportation network company's online-enabled application or platform until the driver accepts a request to transport a passenger, and from the moment the driver completes the transaction on the online-enabled application or platform or the ride is complete, whichever is later, until the driver either accepts another ride request on the online-enabled application or platform or logs off the online-enabled application or platform:

(1) Transportation network company insurance shall be primary and in the amount of at least fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) for death and personal injury per person, one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) for death and personal injury per incident, a*nd thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) for property damage*.

Again the bold-facing is my own for emphasis.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> Reading your own link: "The new California law will require either the TNC, Uber's affiliate Rasier-CA LLC, or the rideshare driver partner to maintain primary third-party liability insurance that provides coverage in the amounts of $50,000 per individual with a total of $100,000 per accident *along with up to $30,000 for property damage during Period 1.*" Bold-facing is my own to emphasize.
> 
> It's not a lot of property damage, but it is some. What it also goes on to say is that YOUR OWN PERSONAL INSURANCE cannot be used to protect you while the app is on ever unless it's specifically rideshare insurance and that because of this, any comprehensive and/or collision coverage you have on your personal insurance does not cover you, but as stated above, you have up to $30k for property damage and it also says this applies ONLY to CA because of a new CA law.
> 
> ...


Agreed it may be confusing for those unlike me who work in the insurance field. However the property damage they are referring to is part of liability it is 3rd party physical damage. This means if a driver in period 1 hits a vehicle and is at fault they will pay up to $30,000 as that is part of liability. This physical damage does not pay one dime towards drivers vehicle.


----------



## Ben105 (Feb 27, 2016)

The CA law does not state 3rd party, only Uber's news report does and it specifically sets 3rd party liability apart from property damage (not using the words 3rd party). I don't want to continue to argue with you. I'm reading the law (not Uber's news report which also has stated in the past that tips are included in the fare). I know what James River told me when I filed a claim. They told me I would not be covered for damage to my car if I didn't have full-coverage on my car. I had to submit my insurance papers to show that I had full coverage. They quoted me an estimate to fix the damage. It was slightly over $750 (the deductible amount at the time), so I just got it fixed on my own. I could have had them do it, but their guy told me it would take a couple of days to fix (no rental reimbursement) and my guy said he could get it done in one day.

It was minor bumper damage, but they would have to replace the entire bumper.


----------



## MattyMikey (Aug 19, 2015)

Ben105 said:


> The CA law does not state 3rd party, only Uber's news report does and it specifically sets 3rd party liability apart from property damage (not using the words 3rd party). I don't want to continue to argue with you. I'm reading the law (not Uber's news report which also has stated in the past that tips are included in the fare). I know what James River told me when I filed a claim. They told me I would not be covered for damage to my car if I didn't have full-coverage on my car. I had to submit my insurance papers to show that I had full coverage. They quoted me an estimate to fix the damage. It was slightly over $750 (the deductible amount at the time), so I just got it fixed on my own. I could have had them do it, but their guy told me it would take a couple of days to fix (no rental reimbursement) and my guy said he could get it done in one day.
> 
> It was minor bumper damage, but they would have to replace the entire bumper.


I'm not trying to argue with you neither, I'm quite fond of you. I just want others (who are not yet getting the gap/rideshare endorsement) to know the facts. The CA law did not specifically have to mention it is 3rd party because it is industry standard. So I of course know that working in insurance but most people who don't see the word Property Damage coverage and think that covers their car. It does not.

http://www.insurance.ca.gov/01-consumers/105-type/95-guides/01-auto/auto101.cfm

*Minimum Property Damage Liability Limits*


$5,000 for damage to the property of other people.
This pays for damage you cause to someone else's car, or to objects and structures that your car hits.
Though the above limits are minimum for personal use, obviously they require Uber to provide $30,000 instead of $5,000

The coverage you are referring to covering YOUR vehicle is mentioned in above link as Physical Damage Coverage (which then breaks up into collision and comprehensive coverage). Physical Damage Coverage is completely separate than Property Damage Coverage.

Another good article with good example is below:

http://www.barakgoldberg.com/proper...sivecollision-coverage-what-you-need-to-know/

Anyone who gets insurance knows and sees it like this 100/300/100

The above would be all liability coverages and stand for 100k(per person)/300k(per accident)/100k(property damage) limits.

Trust me I would be completely happy if your way of thinking was correct, because Seattle as the same rules. But with no Physical Damage coverage it is not safe.

Granted, if you don't have gap you're okay as long as it is not your fault. Because if you're not at fault, then the person that hit you would be paying under their Property Damage Coverage. Luckily since Property Damage Coverage is under liability they would not have a deductible.

Only time there is a deductible required when there is Physical Damage Coverage in most cases. I say most as there is commercial auto policies that require a deductible to be applied on liability claims.

Hope this helps some make sure to get the coverage.


----------



## hanging in there (Oct 1, 2014)

Ben105 said:


> Reading your own link: "The new California law will require either the TNC, Uber's affiliate Rasier-CA LLC, or the rideshare driver partner to maintain primary third-party liability insurance that provides coverage in the amounts of $50,000 per individual with a total of $100,000 per accident *along with up to $30,000 for property damage during Period 1.*" Bold-facing is my own to emphasize.
> 
> It's not a lot of property damage, but it is some. What it also goes on to say is that YOUR OWN PERSONAL INSURANCE cannot be used to protect you while the app is on ever unless it's specifically rideshare insurance and that because of this, any comprehensive and/or collision coverage you have on your personal insurance does not cover you, but as stated above, you have up to $30k for property damage and it also says this applies ONLY to CA because of a new CA law.
> 
> ...


The Uber-supplied graphic for California insurance coverage could not be more clear. The 30k property damage coverage in period 1 is listed under "Liability Insurance", that means other cars/things that you damage in an accident that is your fault. Not yours. Zero for your car even if it is totalled. And zero for any injuries you may have as a result of the accident.

Even if it is the fault of the other driver: if the other driver is uninsured or under-insured then Uber does not cover damage to your car in period 1, only in period 2 or 3. Again, you can see that right on the graphic.

And it is my understanding that Uber (Raiser) still will not pay for any personal injuries to yourself in any case, only injuries to your pax or to the other parties in the accident.


----------



## Salticid (Jun 4, 2016)

Ubernic said:


> Uber says here they insure me in period 1. So I am doing nothing illegal by not having gap insurance.


The coverage provided during Period 1 is freaking terrifying.

Several years back I was driving in Toledo right after a rainstorm. I was behind another car. A young kid was standing on the right side of the road waiting to cross. As the other car and I approached he started to cross, thought better of it, and went to stop himself and return to the curb. He slipped on the wet pavement and as he was falling the car in front of me collided with him. Tragic accident I wish I had not witnessed.

Now imagine the car in front of me was a Period 1 Uber/Lyft driver. Then imagine the kid's mother wanted to sue you for millions of dollars for killing her kid.

When your personal insurance refuses to cover that claim because you were driving commercially, and when Uber/Lyft's meager $200k coverage kicks in, where does that leave you?


----------



## hanging in there (Oct 1, 2014)

Salticid said:


> The coverage provided during Period 1 is freaking terrifying.
> 
> Several years back I was driving in Toledo right after a rainstorm. I was behind another car. A young kid was standing on the right side of the road waiting to cross. As the other car and I approached he started to cross, thought better of it, and went to stop himself and return to the curb. He slipped on the wet pavement and as he was falling the car in front of me collided with him. Tragic accident I wish I had not witnessed.
> 
> ...


Even worse, imagine it was an Uber or Lyft driver playing the app/off surge game and heading to a surge area or a favorite honey spot. No Uber coverage at all in that case, and potentially no personal coverage.


----------



## Older Chauffeur (Oct 16, 2014)

"There is none so blind as he who will not see...." 
Interesting that Uber thinks you will do less harm to others in Period 1 should you have an at-fault accident. The extra 100-200 lbs a pax adds to the weight of your car won't make a difference to the pedestrian you just hit. So if you see an Uber driver headed right for you, make sure he has a pax onboard; your family will thank you.


----------



## hanging in there (Oct 1, 2014)

Older Chauffeur said:


> "There is none so blind as he who will not see...."
> Interesting that Uber thinks you will do less harm to others in Period 1 should you have an at-fault accident. The extra 100-200 lbs a pax adds to the weight of your car won't make a difference to the pedestrian you just hit. So if you see an Uber driver headed right for you, make sure he has a pax onboard; your family will thank you.


Yes... I would argue that from a risk persepective, THE HIGHEST EXPOSURE an insurance company has for a typical TNC driver is in Period 1 or "pre-Period 1" (just made up that term), since that is when the driver is hungry for a fare and is more likely to pull risky stunts and speed in order to get to a "hot spot", and is most likely more distracted while driving and checking the driver and passenger apps of both Uber and Lyft for surges or for driver densities. Uber and Lyft are playing on the general ignorance of lawmakers and the public. There is a reason that taxi and TCP drivers need to have max full-on 24/7 commercial coverage, no games.

Once the pax is in the vehicle, in period 3, the driver is at least going to most likely be in "best behavior" mode, and is probably a safer risk as a driver. The way it is currently set up is laughable for anyone who knows how things really work in this biz.


----------



## Rex8976 (Nov 11, 2014)

Uber Insurance, summed up:

Jibber jabber

Hocus Pocus

Peek-A-Boo

Shell Game

Gobbledegook 

I could go on...


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Rex8976 said:


> Uber Insurance, summed up:
> 
> Jibber jabber
> 
> ...


It's all pretty clear and above board. I'm not sure why you're confused.


----------

