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

41–50 of 144 posts

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

#41

Post by jiggy2011 »

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 guess they could offer this insurance themselves and I'm sure if this became a big enough thing the insurance companies would want a slice of the action.

I wonder if it would be possible to persuade them to insure a "theoretical car" that pays no road tax and does 0 miles per year.

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

#42

Post by rayiner »

guard-of-terra wrote: post #38
newbie12 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The system creates liability for owners of instrumentalities that inherently create a risk to society, like cars.

Should to owners of a coal plant be liable if it explodes and injures people living nearby? Even if they weren't the ones who were operating it at the time?

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

#43

Post by ljf »

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…

Not a reply to parent: - User link2009 - just to let you know, your account it dead - only you and those who have 'view dead' set can see your posts. Not sure how or why your account got killed, but you might want to start over if you want people to be able to view your comments.

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

#44

Post by protomyth »

fl3tch wrote: post #29
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.

When you rent a car, you usually pay for insurance specifically for that car, for the few days you drive it. Why would this be different?

It seems like EasyRide doesn't follow the rental companies time tested way of doing insurance. Having a company policy is interesting, the problem is the courts assume company policies cover vehicles "owned" (through actual ownership or lease) by a company and driven by employees or people under their hire (e.g. consultants). They probably should have gone with part of the fee being an actual insurance policy for the driver for the car. It would be a much easier and known business scenario for the courts.

If your business model requires new rulings by the courts, then you better have deep pockets.

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

#45

Post by rayiner »

I don't get the people complaining about the tort system. The tort system didn't create the losses here, the car and the driver created the losses. The people being severely injured created the losses, and frankly for severe injuries to 4 people in an accident that killed one person, $1.5 million is not an unreasonable estimate of the actual economic loss in this situation. The tort system is just allocating this loss to the parties involved.

The fact of the matter is that cars are dangerous instrumentalities. A car accident can create enormous costs. In car sharing, someone must bear the cost of this risk. With its $1m of liability insurance, RelayRides is taking on a fixed amount of risk, and allocating the rest to the car owner. I think you'd be stupid to take on this risk without more compensation than what RelayRides provides, but that's what Ms. Fong signed up for.

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

#46

Post by guard-of-terra »

rayiner wrote: post #42
guard-of-terra wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The system creates liability for owners of instrumentalities that inherently create a risk to society, like cars. Should to owners of a coal plant be liable if it explodes and injures people living nearby? Even if they weren't the ones who were operating it at the time?

If they lease or sell it, they should not.

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

#47

Post by gcb »

olex wrote: post #31
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 t…

Just for comparison, here in the us insurance for a 25k car and minimal (some 100 or 300k for the described case in the article) plus uninsured driver would be well over 1.2k per month.

In other countries i paid that per year for way more peace of mind.

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

#49

Post by pwthornton »

Zipcar and similar car clubs makes a lot more sense than car sharing. You essentially join Zipcar and share the liability and car ownership costs. $1 million is not enough coverage in the case of a catastrophic accident, and the law and insurance companies have not caught up to car sharing.

I would not rent my car out unless the liability issue was better taken care of. But then again, I don't get car sharing vs. car clubs.

If you need your car so little that you can rent it out, why not just join Zipcar or another car sharing club?

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

#50

Post by kalininalex »

xxpor wrote: post #36

If you wanted to rent your car out like this, how hard is it to set up an LLC so if god forbid something like this happens, they can't come after you personally?

Simply setting up LLC (or any other type of entity) is not sufficient. To shield your personal assets LLC needs to be properly capitalized and be managed like a proper business. Essentially, it will at least require carrying some kind of commercial insurance, plus having extra money in the bank for operating expenses (how much - depends on the business). This sort of defeats the idea of effortless car sharing.
Post reply on HN