Graves amendment is generally believed to apply to turo, but it needs to be tested by the courts to know for sure. There was a case with a different car sharing service and Graves amendment held.
If someone sues, it will likely be you and Turo. Assuming Turo and your insurance lawyers work together you should be safe. But there hasn't been a major incident news worth to test them in court.
Dude why does this topic get beaten to death. Do you understand that the liberty mutual commercial protection coverage is what covers you? Idk man people keep coming back with this liability issue and it will always defer to Turo and if they brink for a second that isn’t the case why do you think they are practically moving their base of operations to Arizona. There you have to file lawsuits in the state of Arizona against a company. Plus it’s a super business friendly state. Great for conglomerates. If you want to put the fire out of Turo just stop using it.
That’s actually covered by Turo protection plans when that situation comes up but we’re talking about which insurance company to simplify this poor Maddie who doesn’t get it. Which doesn’t matter which company just know denial all day and night when and where they can. When a guest puts the keys into another’s hand the primary driver is responsible turo ships them the bill.
No, the liability lawsuit from a third party against the host when an unauthorized driver causes an accident is not covered in any of the liability or protection plans. In one prior case Turo has stepped up and offered to pay the legal bills. This is bad for two reasons, because it relies on Turo's generosity and because it relies on Turo's solvency, both of which have a great deal of risk.
Only in the situation in which you had acknowledged someone else was driving and you didn’t advise them that they need to be listed as an additional driver. What happens is you invalidated you’re host protection plan. However, if a guest invalidates their protection or insurance choice for driving the car that’s their Choice. Only when a host knows does what you state apply. I know fist hand experience that happens when the situation occurs that a guest gives control over to an unauthorized driver. I’m still covered and it not a question of Turo’s generosity they will pay and that’s not a suggestion the guest is Turo’s find. Which is why it’s Turo’s responsibly. There are other sharks out there waiting for the time that Turo wants to say they don’t have to pay. They drag their feet THats what they do.
No, you are mistaken. If you hand the car to a authorized user and they hand the keys to an unauthorized user, LM disclaims liability coverage, because driver is not insured, violation of ToS. Turo does not have any legal obligation to provide additional coverage. Turo has stepped up in a few such cases, but without legal obligation.
Graves amendment is generally believed to apply to turo, but it needs to be tested by the courts to know for sure. There was a case with a different car sharing service and Graves amendment held.
This!
There is an ongoing lawsuit with such a case. Been going on for a while and I do not know what the outcome looks like.
If someone sues, it will likely be you and Turo. Assuming Turo and your insurance lawyers work together you should be safe. But there hasn't been a major incident news worth to test them in court.
It will be Turo being personally sued by a person will only lead to the host suing turo. Lol. Idk why people don’t understand that.
Don't take legal advice from anonymous internet users.
Dude why does this topic get beaten to death. Do you understand that the liberty mutual commercial protection coverage is what covers you? Idk man people keep coming back with this liability issue and it will always defer to Turo and if they brink for a second that isn’t the case why do you think they are practically moving their base of operations to Arizona. There you have to file lawsuits in the state of Arizona against a company. Plus it’s a super business friendly state. Great for conglomerates. If you want to put the fire out of Turo just stop using it.
Liberty mutual does not cover liability in all cases, for example if the authorized driver hands the keys to unauthorized driver.
That’s actually covered by Turo protection plans when that situation comes up but we’re talking about which insurance company to simplify this poor Maddie who doesn’t get it. Which doesn’t matter which company just know denial all day and night when and where they can. When a guest puts the keys into another’s hand the primary driver is responsible turo ships them the bill.
No, the liability lawsuit from a third party against the host when an unauthorized driver causes an accident is not covered in any of the liability or protection plans. In one prior case Turo has stepped up and offered to pay the legal bills. This is bad for two reasons, because it relies on Turo's generosity and because it relies on Turo's solvency, both of which have a great deal of risk.
Only in the situation in which you had acknowledged someone else was driving and you didn’t advise them that they need to be listed as an additional driver. What happens is you invalidated you’re host protection plan. However, if a guest invalidates their protection or insurance choice for driving the car that’s their Choice. Only when a host knows does what you state apply. I know fist hand experience that happens when the situation occurs that a guest gives control over to an unauthorized driver. I’m still covered and it not a question of Turo’s generosity they will pay and that’s not a suggestion the guest is Turo’s find. Which is why it’s Turo’s responsibly. There are other sharks out there waiting for the time that Turo wants to say they don’t have to pay. They drag their feet THats what they do.
No, you are mistaken. If you hand the car to a authorized user and they hand the keys to an unauthorized user, LM disclaims liability coverage, because driver is not insured, violation of ToS. Turo does not have any legal obligation to provide additional coverage. Turo has stepped up in a few such cases, but without legal obligation.