# Hybrid Insurance deadline



## UberSneak (Dec 31, 2014)

So from what I've read here and there, Uber and Lyft will require their drivers to have this hybrid Insurance by this summer (please correct me if anything I say is wrong). I believe this is due to a new law or something that passed. So some confusing points to me are: is this a new insurance that the drivers will pay for? Or will Uber/Lyft pay it for us? The deadline passes, the hybrid plan is available, do drivers need that plan ASAP to continue driving?

And now I'd like to speculate on what this insurance requirement could mean. Again, if I'm wrong please let me know. The hybrid plan comes out, drivers have to pay it themselves. Uber/Lyft gives their drivers X amount of time to get the new plan. If after that time, they do not have it, drivers will be deactivated until they get the plan. So now drivers have to decide if it's worth doing Uber/Lyft with the added cost of a higher insurance. This deters lots of drivers from driving. Enough to unsaturate the market? Maybe, maybe not. But a good amount of drivers would decide to quit if they HAVE to get the new insurance and pay it themselves. So now there's less drivers (good for the remaining drivers) but they have a much higher insurance premium they have to pay (bad for remaining drivers). 

I used to be hopeful that Uber/Lyft would eventually shift their focus towards their drivers instead of just on their riders. That hope has died a terrible death, but its soul still lingers somewhere in my subconscious, secretly waiting for the day Uber/Lyft start caring about their drivers. I think that day will be around the insurance deadline. Uber/Lyft might raise the rates to help drivers with the higher insurance costs. Yay! Right? Probably not. Our costs have gone up, so our rates have to go up considerably in other for it to be a true pay increase. Or else where in the exact same position were in right now.

And now my car is done being tinted so I cannot continue my essay. Hopefully you guys can follow and understand what I meant. Realistically though, I'd say Uber, if possible, would just push back that deadline as long as possible and keep things as is.


----------



## CaptainJackLA (Dec 4, 2014)

Some insurance would drop your policy if the find out you are Driving For Hire.


----------



## CS289 (Dec 10, 2014)

Sidecar has period 1 insurance as of 12/14/2015. Its part of their company carried policy for their drivers.


----------



## CaptainJackLA (Dec 4, 2014)

CS289 said:


> Sidecar has period 1 insurance as of 12/14/2015. Its part of their company carried policy for their drivers.


Period 1 ?

_*Is that used only once a month ?*_


----------



## CS289 (Dec 10, 2014)

CaptainJackLA said:


> Period 1 ?
> 
> _*Is that used only once a month ?*_


Lol, phase 1 or Period 1 is the time frame when the app is open and you are waiting for a ride, but I am sure you knew that.


----------



## UberSneak (Dec 31, 2014)

CaptainJackLA said:


> Some insurance would drop your policy if the find out you are Driving For Hire.


Oh that I know, I think almost all insurance would drop you. I think that's why they are pushing this hybrid insurance, it's half commercial half personal. It would completely replace the insurance you have. That way drivers (that decide to get it) wouldn't have to worry about being dropped.


----------



## hanging in there (Oct 1, 2014)

UberSneak said:


> So from what I've read here and there, Uber and Lyft will require their drivers to have this hybrid Insurance by this summer (please correct me if anything I say is wrong). I believe this is due to a new law or something that passed. So some confusing points to me are: is this a new insurance that the drivers will pay for? Or will Uber/Lyft pay it for us? The deadline passes, the hybrid plan is available, do drivers need that plan ASAP to continue driving?
> 
> And now I'd like to speculate on what this insurance requirement could mean. Again, if I'm wrong please let me know. The hybrid plan comes out, drivers have to pay it themselves. Uber/Lyft gives their drivers X amount of time to get the new plan. If after that time, they do not have it, drivers will be deactivated until they get the plan. So now drivers have to decide if it's worth doing Uber/Lyft with the added cost of a higher insurance. This deters lots of drivers from driving. Enough to unsaturate the market? Maybe, maybe not. But a good amount of drivers would decide to quit if they HAVE to get the new insurance and pay it themselves. So now there's less drivers (good for the remaining drivers) but they have a much higher insurance premium they have to pay (bad for remaining drivers).
> 
> ...


As it is currently written AB2293 allows for any combination of: TNC companies paying, driver paying or some kind of split. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. I personally think that the most reasonable and seamless approach is to have the driver carry the hybrid policy and pay for it since A) you know you will be paying either way, if the TNC's pay then that cost will get passed along to you somehow anyway, and B) a driver policy would cover you without all the confusion and fighting and possible claim denials/delays etc that I can envision happening if, let's say, you happen to be in period one for 2 or 3 TNC's at the same time.

Even if the current 3 TNC's were to come up with some kind of cooperative agreement about cost-splitting or whatever, what if in the near future more and more new TNC's start popping up. One driver policy covering both period zero (app off) and period one makes more sense to me.


----------



## TeleSki (Dec 4, 2014)

I think it would be paid for by the driver, like the Hybrid policy being sold now in two states (Illinois & Indiana?). Instead of buying your regular personal insurance, you would buy a hybrid policy instead. A lady on another said, I believe, it raised her premium by about 20%, or $200 per year. Not bad for guaranteed coverage. Uber's policy would still be primary while transporting passengers.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

UberSneak said:


> Oh that I know, I think almost all insurance would drop you. I think that's why they are pushing this hybrid insurance, it's half commercial half personal. It would completely replace the insurance you have. That way drivers (that decide to get it) wouldn't have to worry about being dropped.


If you lease a car and they see that type of insurance insuring the car, I imagine this could create some problems with them. Any thoughts?


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

UberSneak said:


> So from what I've read here and there, Uber and Lyft will require their drivers to have this hybrid Insurance by this summer (please correct me if anything I say is wrong). I believe this is due to a new law or something that passed. So some confusing points to me are: is this a new insurance that the drivers will pay for? Or will Uber/Lyft pay it for us? The deadline passes, the hybrid plan is available, do drivers need that plan ASAP to continue driving?
> 
> And now I'd like to speculate on what this insurance requirement could mean. Again, if I'm wrong please let me know. The hybrid plan comes out, drivers have to pay it themselves. Uber/Lyft gives their drivers X amount of time to get the new plan. If after that time, they do not have it, drivers will be deactivated until they get the plan. So now drivers have to decide if it's worth doing Uber/Lyft with the added cost of a higher insurance. This deters lots of drivers from driving. Enough to unsaturate the market? Maybe, maybe not. But a good amount of drivers would decide to quit if they HAVE to get the new insurance and pay it themselves. So now there's less drivers (good for the remaining drivers) but they have a much higher insurance premium they have to pay (bad for remaining drivers).
> 
> ...


This is news to me? Did Uber send out something about this that I missed and/or is this only applicable in certain states?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

hanging in there said:


> AB2293


AB2293 goes into effect July 1st 2015. But California PUC has taken the position that the Gap insurance requirement implementation date needs to be effective ASAP, and is holding hearings on it currently.

New Gap insurance requirements, similar to AB2293 went into effect on Jan 15th in Colorado.
This is how Uber responded to CO Insr requirements:
*INSURANCE DESIGNED WITH UBER IN MIND
http://uberxcolorado.com/drive/?page_id=483*

Extended discussion in this thread:
https://uberpeople.net/threads/effe...rivers-their-insurance-aint-worth-shit.11613/

Attn. @Walkersm @KevinH


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

@uberpeople.net @UPModerator can this thread be moved to Insurance sub forum?
Thanx!


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

I was under the impression CA PUC is suppose to issue new regs on hybrid insurance. After that, insurance companies would start offering it in Cali. Thoughts Chi1cabby?


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> I was under the impression CA PUC is suppose to issue new regs on hybrid insurance. After that, insurance companies would start offering it in Cali. Thoughts Chi1cabby?


Yes. CA Dept of Insr is working on licensing/authorising these new hybrid policies. But this issue is also being discussed by CPUC.
http://m.sfgate.com/business/article/Hybrid-insurance-for-Uber-Lyft-drivers-is-on-the-5894075.php


----------



## UberSneak (Dec 31, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> This is news to me? Did Uber send out something about this that I missed and/or is this only applicable in certain states?


It's not something super recent, it was like September 2014 or so when the bill passed. I was just wondering about the deadline and so on. My thinking on this was if this new insurance comes out, and we HAVE to get it, it could potentially un-saturate the market since I'm sure a lot of drivers would not want the extra cost of the new insurance. Though with the rates as low as they are, unsaturating the market would just cause the drivers who stay to rack up even more miles.....
And yea, I would think leasing a car for Uber/Lyft may raise some eyebrows at the dealer. Isn't there a certain number of miles you can drive under the lease contract? I imagine if it stays under that amount it would be fine. And if they go over, I'm sure the dealer would charge per mile. Way more than what Uber would be paying you per mile that's for sure.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

UberSneak said:


> It's not something super recent, it was like September 2014 or so when the bill passed. I was just wondering about the deadline and so on. My thinking on this was if this new insurance comes out, and we HAVE to get it, it could potentially un-saturate the market since I'm sure a lot of drivers would not want the extra cost of the new insurance. Though with the rates as low as they are, unsaturating the market would just cause the drivers who stay to rack up even more miles.....
> And yea, I would think leasing a car for Uber/Lyft may raise some eyebrows at the dealer. Isn't there a certain number of miles you can drive under the lease contract? I imagine if it stays under that amount it would be fine. And if they go over, I'm sure the dealer would charge per mile. Way more than what Uber would be paying you per mile that's for sure.


There is definitely a set amount of miles one can drive annually under lease agreement. The lessee (driver) negotiates the annual miles and the monthly payment is based on the annual miles pursuant to the lease. Obviously, the more miles, the higher the monthly payment and an additional charge per mile is assessed on miles over the negotiated mileage. The lease agreement list the overage rate. (I think mine is .25 per mile). The leasing company requires proof of insurance and for insurance to be kept current given that the lessor actually owns the car. I think if a lessee gives the leasing company hybrid insurance policy this would raise a red flag. I believe there is a clause in typical car lease agreements that the auto cannot be used for commercial purposes. I'm not expert but this is my understanding. I have never looked closely at this because I wasn't ever thinking of using my car for commercial purposes in the past.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> Yes. CA Dept of Insr is working on licensing/authorising these new hybrid policies. But this issue is also being discussed by CPUC.
> http://m.sfgate.com/business/article/Hybrid-insurance-for-Uber-Lyft-drivers-is-on-the-5894075.php


Are you aware of any deadline in California for TNC drivers to have hybrid insurance chi1cabby?


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> If you lease a car and they see that type of insurance insuring the car, I imagine this could create some problems with them. Any thoughts?


All the pizza delivery people rent cars when theirs is in the shop and I actually had a wreck in one while delivering pizza (minor a lady pulled out of a parking lot while I was stopped at a light and hit the side not too hard). Hertz and my insurance (state farm) didn't blink and both know I deliver pizza. But that's a rental not a lease. FYI I don't know of one person who delivers pizza and has commercial insurance. What seems to happen if you do have an at fault wreck is that worse case scenario they pay and THEN cancel you. But totally denying the claim is something I haven't seen happen. My ex years ago was hit by a drunk driver while putting kids out at stores to sell newspapers (truck totaled no one hurt) and had to go through the uninsured motorist coverage since the other driver had no insurance and they paid then canceled him (farmers) but he had no problem getting new insurance.

In the US each state has different insurance rules too though. Texas doesn't have no fault and that probably changes the dynamic in states that do. Plus farmers is notorious for canceling people.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

UberSneak said:


> It's not something super recent, it was like September 2014 or so when the bill passed. I was just wondering about the deadline and so on. My thinking on this was if this new insurance comes out, and we HAVE to get it, it could potentially un-saturate the market since I'm sure a lot of drivers would not want the extra cost of the new insurance. Though with the rates as low as they are, unsaturating the market would just cause the drivers who stay to rack up even more miles.....
> And yea, I would think leasing a car for Uber/Lyft may raise some eyebrows at the dealer. Isn't there a certain number of miles you can drive under the lease contract? I imagine if it stays under that amount it would be fine. And if they go over, I'm sure the dealer would charge per mile. Way more than what Uber would be paying you per mile that's for sure.


Why would anyone lease a car anyway if they are likely to rack up a lot of miles. Better to buy. I've seen too many people who leased and then ended up buying the vehicle because the mileage was over and it just cost more. Course I'm in the Houston tx area and around here people routinely put 30000 miles on a car just commuting and getting around. The few years I didn't work out of a vehicle I still drove 24000 a year.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Fuzzyelvis said:


> Why would anyone lease a car anyway if they are likely to rack up a lot of miles. Better to buy. I've seen too many people who leased and then ended up buying the vehicle because the mileage was over and it just cost more. Course I'm in the Houston tx area and around here people routinely put 30000 miles on a car just commuting and getting around. The few years I didn't work out of a vehicle I still drove 24000 a year.


. Totally agree. Pre Uber I drove 10 to 12k a year. Now it's like 24K+ and I drive part time. I'm buying my next car out right.


----------



## Bart McCoy (Nov 4, 2014)

um is this just for California or something? or are you saying nationwide everyone has to have hybrid insurance by summer?
dont think that was clear


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> Are you aware of any deadline in California for TNC drivers to have hybrid insurance


July 1st 2015 is the implementation deadline for AB2293.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> July 1st 2015 is the implementation deadline for AB2293.


That is around the corner. It seems to me the TNC companies should start telling drivers in CA about these requirements... I haven't seen any insurance companies offering any hybrid policies in CA as of now (not that I have researched it much).


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> That is around the corner. It seems to me the TNC companies should start telling drivers in CA about these requirements... I haven't seen any insurance companies offering any hybrid policies in CA as of now (not that I have researched it much).


My first post has all the info
https://uberpeople.net/threads/hybrid-insurance-deadline.10647/#post-151288


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

I will have to read AB2293. I still do not know exactly what it requires and have heard nothing about it from Lyft or Uber.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

hanging in there said:


> As it is currently written AB2293 allows for any combination of: TNC companies paying, driver paying or some kind of split. It will be interesting to see how it pans out. I personally think that the most reasonable and seamless approach is to have the driver carry the hybrid policy and pay for it since A) you know you will be paying either way, if the TNC's pay then that cost will get passed along to you somehow anyway, and B) a driver policy would cover you without all the confusion and fighting and possible claim denials/delays etc that I can envision happening if, let's say, you happen to be in period one for 2 or 3 TNC's at the same time.
> 
> Even if the current 3 TNC's were to come up with some kind of cooperative agreement about cost-splitting or whatever, what if in the near future more and more new TNC's start popping up. One driver policy covering both period zero (app off) and period one makes more sense to me.


POST # 7 /hanginginthere: ♤♡♢♧ Thank you
for the detailed explanation. I'm glad that the
CA. PUC dragged #Mr.ConstipatedBedhead
to the table. 1 down and 49 to go?
Perhaps Sidecar's acquiessance will prompt
#FUBER to roll out the hybrid nationwide.


----------



## Casuale Haberdasher (Dec 7, 2014)

chi1cabby said:


> Yes. CA Dept of Insr is working on licensing/authorising these new hybrid policies. But this issue is also being discussed by CPUC.
> http://m.sfgate.com/business/article/Hybrid-insurance-for-Uber-Lyft-drivers-is-on-the-5894075.php


POST # 24 & others/ @chi1cabby : ♤♡♢♧
Thanks again for being the Hyperlink
Leader! Also, your encouragement re:
the "disappearance" of @Worcester Sauce
was heartening. I myself was chastened on 1/26
by my first "warning" but WITHOUT inter-
ruption or electronic gulag-ing.


----------



## Rich Brunelle (Jan 15, 2015)

Is there a law requiring TNC cars be hybrids?


----------



## Dave W (Sep 22, 2014)

Rich...no. they are referring to the type of insurance not the type of vehicle. Hybrid is the new term being used to cover drivers who use personal vehicles for ridesharing purposes.


----------



## SCdave (Jun 27, 2014)

Gemgirlla said:


> I will have to read AB2293. I still do not know exactly what it requires and have heard nothing about it from Lyft or Uber.


Most likely Uber/Lyft will not bring this up to Drivers until the last minute. They only want to Onboard new drivers as fast as possible and leave the trivial stuff that is "not important" until the last minute.

Sigh....

Edit: And they'er working on figuring out how to make a profit off of any Insurance changes like this. How to make a profit equals how to transfer as much of the cost onto Drivers vs Uber/Lyft.

...and they are also working on their Uber Spin.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Rich Brunelle said:


> Is there a law requiring TNC cars be hybrids?


Not yet LOL


----------



## Rich Brunelle (Jan 15, 2015)

Dave W said:


> Rich...no. they are referring to the type of insurance not the type of vehicle. Hybrid is the new term being used to cover drivers who use personal vehicles for ridesharing purposes.


Thank You for the clarification, I recall years back there was some move for hybrid cars to be the norm and when you are my age remembering can be a challenge or fun depending on the topic.


----------



## Rahat1 (Feb 5, 2015)

A brand new policy is going to be passed for TNC drivers that will cover for both personal and for their commercial activities by the time July 1, 2015 deadline. It is not yet decided who is going to be pay the drivers or the TNC company. AB2293 says either TNCs or drivers can pay for period1 coverage- it doesn't have to come from the companies. In a question on that topic Eva Behrend said, “The legislation does not take effect until July 2015 and intentionally leaves the option open for either the driver or the TNC to carry the insurance. This gives the insurance industry time to develop a hybrid product.”


----------



## MikeB (Dec 2, 2014)

Regardless who pays the premium for livery insurance - TNC's or drivers, the personal automobile insurance carriers will cancel policies once they learn that the covered automobile is involved in livery business. And because all insurance companies use so called "insurance pool" the fact that the personal policy has been cancelled by an insurance company due to their insured being involved in Ubering/Lyfting will be known to other insurerance companies immediately. It will be very hard to obtain a personal automobile policy for someone whose insurance has been cancelled by their previous insurance company for using their personal vehicles for transporting passengers for hire.


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

The TNCs have about 5 weeks to get hybrid policies in place for their California driver bases. The total might be around 50,ooo drivers currently active.This seems like an awfully tight crunch.

Knowing that the TNCs seem to disconnect themselves from any sort of regulation, does anyone want to speculate on how this will pan out? It would seem that they would not deactivate drivers that have not complied. Instead they would mount PR campaigns to delay implementation or enforcement.

Just saw the Farmers announcement about their policy being available tomorrow in California, not sure what the cost will be though. That makes only two carriers and one is partnered only with Uber

The stakeholders have been working on this for over a year. The auto financing companies have added their concerns during regulatory debates in other states and the California insurance commissioner Dave Jones is not a fan of the TNCs.
Specifically, speculation about;
*What sort of review/enforcement action will the California PUC take on July 1?
* Do we know of other carriers that plan to announce coverage in the next few weeks?
* Is there a mechanism whereby the TNC's can create/apply some sort of 24/7 coverage to replace or supplement personal policies that meets California insurance standards?
* Will the PUC be receptive to TNCs arguments that say "We just now got available policies, give us more time to convert our driver bases".


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

Problem solved, Uber and Lyft will not require hybrid coverage. PUC does not know who the drivers are, so no enforcement of AB 2293.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

KevinH said:


> Problem solved, Uber and Lyft will not require hybrid coverage. PUC does not know who the drivers are, so no enforcement of AB 2293.


Are you speculating? I can't get an answer from Uber.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> Are you speculating? I can't get an answer from Uber.


Why would you not have proper coverage when it's available?


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Beur said:


> Why would you not have proper coverage when it's available?


Because I'm not a full time driver and don't want to pay a per mile rate on miles from non-uber use. I also currently have excellent insurance w/ USAA at a very good price. It would turn my car into a commercial vehicle, which wasn't the point of this thing in the first place. Say I want to drive my car to San Fran for a vacation. If I get the insurance, its gone to kill me in mileage. This type of insurance is limiting our personal use of our cars. Its as if you need to dedicate a car to just ride share now if you driver any significant miles not related to Uber driving.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> Because I'm not a full time driver and don't want to pay a per mile rate on miles from non-uber use. I also currently have excellent insurance w/ USAA at a very good price. It would turn my car into a commercial vehicle, which wasn't the point of this thing in the first place. Say I want to drive my car to San Fran for a vacation. If I get the insurance, its gone to kill me in mileage. This type of insurance is limiting our personal use of our cars. Its as if you need to dedicate a car to just ride share now if you driver any significant miles not related to Uber driving.


There's a 150 mile a day cap. So depending on your per mile rare, I think the highest is $0.08 that's $12.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> Because I'm not a full time driver and don't want to pay a per mile rate on miles from non-uber use. I also currently have excellent insurance w/ USAA at a very good price. It would turn my car into a commercial vehicle, which wasn't the point of this thing in the first place. Say I want to drive my car to San Fran for a vacation. If I get the insurance, its gone to kill me in mileage. This type of insurance is limiting our personal use of our cars. Its as if you need to dedicate a car to just ride share now if you driver any significant miles not related to Uber driving.


PS - I have heard rumor USAA is coming out with a program as well.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Beur said:


> PS - I have heard rumor USAA is coming out with a program as well.


I heard they have a policy in Colorado. I'm kind of waiting to see what they do here before jumping ship. I need to run the numbers on the metroline policy and see where it comes out considering actual uber v. non uber miles. In abstract, it is hard to tell how much more it would cost me. With business slow, saturation of the Plus market, gas prices going up, possibility of Uber raising the commission, who knows what they will do w/ rate (further decrease), etc.... driving for Uber is becoming a less profitable venture. I do this for money. only. I don't know if I want to change my insurance and then realize I don't want to drive anymore. The business is so uncertain now that I don't necessarily want to flag my insurance company that I've been driving ride share if they don't have the hybrid insurance (when they don't know at the moment.). I think a lot of other drivers (especially part time ones) who have been around awhile are feeling the same way.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> I heard they have a policy in Colorado. I'm kind of waiting to see what they do here before jumping ship. I need to run the numbers on the metroline policy and see where it comes out considering actual uber v. non uber miles. In abstract, it is hard to tell how much more it would cost me. With business slow, saturation of the Plus market, gas prices going up, possibility of Uber raising the commission, who knows what they will do w/ rate (further decrease), etc.... driving for Uber is becoming a less profitable venture. I do this for money. only. I don't know if I want to change my insurance and then realize I don't want to drive anymore. The business is so uncertain now that I don't necessarily want to flag my insurance company that I've been driving ride share if they don't have the hybrid insurance (when they don't know at the moment.). I think a lot of other drivers (especially part time ones) who have been around awhile are feeling the same way.


I hear ya, I only drive weekends, but I want the piece of mind. For as much as I driver personally the MM coverage has worked out to be cheaper than my old insurance. Only time I saw over $100 was this month due to Coachella/Stagecoach.


----------



## Gemgirlla (Oct 16, 2014)

Beur said:


> I hear ya, I only drive weekends, but I want the piece of mind. For as much as I driver personally the MM coverage has worked out to be cheaper than my old insurance. Only time I saw over $100 was this month due to Coachella/Stagecoach.


That's good to know. Thanks! That makes me feel a little better. I'm going to get a quote and see what it looks like for me w/ my car.


----------



## Beur (Apr 14, 2015)

Gemgirlla said:


> That's good to know. Thanks! That makes me feel a little better. I'm going to get a quote and see what it looks like for me w/ my car.


The only way Farmers helps me is if I hit the $140 or more mark each month, hasn't happened. And as I said daily miles are capped at 150


----------



## KevinH (Jul 13, 2014)

KevinH said:


> Problem solved, Uber and Lyft will not require hybrid coverage. PUC does not know who the drivers are, so no enforcement of AB 2293.


This was at the bottom of the LA Times article.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-insurer-estimates-uber-lyft-risk-20150527-story.html

"Spokespeople for Uber and Lyft said their comapnies would not require drivers to carry ride-sharing policies."


----------



## chi1cabby (May 28, 2014)

UberSneak said:


> So from what I've read here and there, Uber and Lyft will require their drivers to have this hybrid Insurance by this summer


The effective date of California Law AB 2293 is July 1st, 2015. It requires Primary Liability Insurance coverage during the Gap Period.

Uber sent out an email to California drivers about the new Farmers Gap Insurance policy. The email didn't mention the July 1st deadline. It actually claimed that Drivers already have this coverage through Uber, without mentioning the fact that it's coverage is Secondary & Contingent, and not Primary, as required by the law.

*https://uberpeople.net/threads/california-farmers-gap-insurance.21345/#post-294848*


----------

