Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 144 posts

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#31

Post by olex »

atirip wrote: post #25

Well, this shows how fucked up US system is... In Europe this absolutely cannot happen. First, everybodys is health is insured by state, so whatever injuries in whatever car accident anybody may have, there's no claims to present to anybody - state pays everything. Secondly, one in Europe shall not fear any "pain-and-suffering suits", and even more when you are just the owner of the vehicle. Third, liability insuranc…

I live in Germany, and not all of this is entirely true.

Liability insurance isn't strictly unlimited, the coverage limits are just very high - e.g. in Germany, personal damages are covered with a minimum of 7,5 mio. euro (with a maximum limit of 8 to 15 million per person, depending on the insurance company), and total damage is mostly limited at 50-100 mio. euro. For most accidents, these numbers are fairly equal to "unlimited".

About health insurance - I'm not quite sure how you come at the conclusion that state pays everything. Injuries in an accident are paid for by the liable party's liability insurance, the same as in the U.S.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#32

Post by jacquesgt »

delinka wrote: post #20
steve8918 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the person didn't have their own car, I would be surprised if they had their own car insurance. The victims could sue the estate, but there might not be a lot of money in it.

In my state, you can't get auto insurance without a car. You can be a licensed driver, you can have money to hand the insurance company for your premium, but if you don't own a car, you can't get car insurance. I don't know if you could get general liability insurance that would also cover you driving other people's cars. But if it's the car that's insured, why do specific drivers have to be listed on the policy? The…

When you're driving someone else's car, their collision/comprehensive insurance covers damage to their car (although there's a chance their insurance company will decline to pay or decide to sue you depending on the circumstances). Your liability insurance covers personal injury and property damage that you cause to others.

Drivers are listed for two reasons. The first is because a big chunk of car insurance is liability insurance. The second is because the probability of the insurance company having to pay to repair or replace your car depends on the likelihood one of the drivers will cause an accident.

This is all made more complicated by the fact that personal injury lawsuits are a numbers game. If the driver didn't have insurance and their estate has very little money, it doesn't matter that making them liable is a slam dunk case. It's not worth the effort. On the other hand, if the car owner has insurance, is alive, and has a lifetime income potential in the tens of millions of dollars, that's worth a lawsuit even if the probability of success is lower.

It feels scummy, but most personal injury lawyers are investing in cases. They'll be happy to take a lower probability chance on a bigger return. It's not all that different from venture capital, although you could argue pretty easily that VCs are a more positive force for social good and value creation.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#33

Post by DanBC »

alister wrote: post #28
jiggy2011 wrote: post #10

Perhaps the answer here is to insist that a renter must either have valid insurance already that would pay out to third parties in the event that they were driving any vehicle. Most fully comprehensive insurance in the UK already covers this assuming you have valid fully comp on some car already. For example I (being fully insured on my own car) could drive a friend's car without being specifically insured on it and…

> insist that a renter...have valid insurance [or pay a higher fee] If you don't own a car it is just about impossible to buy a liability insurance policy. I know this. I tried. I tried very hard. I don't own a car myself, but since I often rent a car when I travel, I decided that I'd try to buy a third-party liability policy instead of paying the absurd prices that Avis or Dollar charge (>$20 a day). I called about…

Does this mean there's a niche for someone with a lot of land to buy many very cheap-to-insure vehicles and sell them to people who don't want a car but need one for insurance?

The vehicles stay on the land.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#34

Post by link2009 »

atirip wrote: post #25

Well, this shows how fucked up US system is... In Europe this absolutely cannot happen. First, everybodys is health is insured by state, so whatever injuries in whatever car accident anybody may have, there's no claims to present to anybody - state pays everything. Secondly, one in Europe shall not fear any "pain-and-suffering suits", and even more when you are just the owner of the vehicle. Third, liability insuranc…

Like olex said, this is completely incorrect. "In Europe this absolutely cannot happen. First, everybodys is health is insured by state, so whatever injuries in whatever car accident anybody may have, there's no claims to present to anybody - state pays everything."

I personally don't know of any states that do this in Europe but I guarantee you in Eastern Europe this is entirely untrue.

Why are you trying to make the US system look bad with these lies?

Think about how damaging it would be to a state's economy to cover these kinds of accidents on a regular basis.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#35

Post by [deleted] »

libria wrote: post #22

> On one hand, she is certainly an inviting target. After all, she has worked full-time at Google and is now finishing her degree at M.I.T. She probably has many millions of dollars of income ahead of her that a lawyer could try to garnish. Absolutely disgusting. Our system punishes those brilliant and capable minds that can drive the nations economy. Meanwhile, underachievers everywhere can sleep peacefully. Unless…

[deleted]

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#37

Post by sliverstorm »

haberman wrote: post #16

It seems perverse that mere ownership of something can create liability. If she had failed to get some maintenance that made the car dangerous to drive, that would be one thing. But there is no indication that this is the case. If a psychopath rents a VHS from Blockbuster and then uses it to bludgeon someone's head in, is Blockbuster liable for that act of violence? Sure, a VHS is not intended to be used this way, bu…

Ownership implies responsibility. For precedence, see pets and children.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#38

Post by guard-of-terra »

newbie12 wrote: post #27
libria wrote: post #22

> On one hand, she is certainly an inviting target. After all, she has worked full-time at Google and is now finishing her degree at M.I.T. She probably has many millions of dollars of income ahead of her that a lawyer could try to garnish. Absolutely disgusting. Our system punishes those brilliant and capable minds that can drive the nations economy. Meanwhile, underachievers everywhere can sleep peacefully. Unless…

She has clear liability. She agreed, after reviewing the request, to rent her car, for a profit, to someone who was a reckless driver and did serious harm to others (and, sadly, himself). I hate the U.S. tort system but some liability in this case is pretty reasonable.

No there isn't. You neither can nor should screen buyers and renters. This simply isn't your job. And it harms the business the big way. When people rent cars they also rent the risk.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#39

Post by wdr1 »

atirip wrote: post #25

Well, this shows how fucked up US system is... In Europe this absolutely cannot happen. First, everybodys is health is insured by state, so whatever injuries in whatever car accident anybody may have, there's no claims to present to anybody - state pays everything. Secondly, one in Europe shall not fear any "pain-and-suffering suits", and even more when you are just the owner of the vehicle. Third, liability insuranc…

FYI, Europe is a continent, not a country. It's compromised of several individual countries, each with its own laws & institutions. There is almost nothing that is singularly true across them all. To make such a broad generalization, either ignores their differences or involves selective inclusion of countries you consider "your" Europe.

Re: Fatal Collision Makes Car-Sharing Worries No Longer Theoretical

#40

Post by Estragon »

alister wrote: post #28
jiggy2011 wrote: post #10

Perhaps the answer here is to insist that a renter must either have valid insurance already that would pay out to third parties in the event that they were driving any vehicle. Most fully comprehensive insurance in the UK already covers this assuming you have valid fully comp on some car already. For example I (being fully insured on my own car) could drive a friend's car without being specifically insured on it and…

> insist that a renter...have valid insurance [or pay a higher fee] If you don't own a car it is just about impossible to buy a liability insurance policy. I know this. I tried. I tried very hard. I don't own a car myself, but since I often rent a car when I travel, I decided that I'd try to buy a third-party liability policy instead of paying the absurd prices that Avis or Dollar charge (>$20 a day). I called about…

I'm really curious about the actuarial basis of this policy.
Post reply on HN