January 28, 2019

We are searching for a coverage answer under the insured's policy. On the date of the loss Ms. D was a passenger in the insured's car. The car was parked and she was alone in the car in the front driver seat. There were gunshots heard in the area, a car came around the corner in the parking lot and hit the car that Ms. D was sitting in and left the scene. This was initially reported as a hit and run. The driver of the car that hit insured's car later came forward to the police.

The driver of the car that hit the insured's car was the victim of an attempted carjacking; the two carjackers had handguns and shot at the driver of the car that hit the insured's car as he was fleeing the scene. The driver of the car that hit insured's car does have insurance coverage for the loss date. It appears the driver's negligence of the car that hit the insured's car would not be an uninsured motorist claim. The driver's carrier of the car that hit insured's car is pending acceptance of coverage and/or liability.

The next issue is; would the two carjacking gunmen meet the definition of an “uninsured motorist” under the insured's contract and current case law. The last matter that remains outstanding is uninsured motorist primacy. In the event that Ms. D or a resident relative own a car with uninsured motorist, that coverage would provide primary coverage for Ms. D but she states that there were no cars in her household on the date of this accident.

Georgia Subscriber

In your situation you have no uninsured motorist. An uninsured motorist is a vehicle with no insurance coverage; it cannot be an attempting carjacker or other person on foot.

In order for Ms. D to receive coverage under the insured's med pay, she must be either a family member or other person “occupying” the covered auto. However, if the vehicle was being used in the insured's employment or other factors it could be excluded. You need to check the exclusions.

The other party who hit the insured's vehicle is responsible. Even though he was fleeing carjackers, that does not change the fact that he struck another vehicle. Unfortunate circumstances perhaps, but that does not absolve him from liability for the loss.

This premium content is locked for FC&S Coverage Interpretation Subscribers

Enjoy unlimited access to the trusted solution for successful interpretation and analyses of complex insurance policies.

  • Quality content from industry experts with over 60 years insurance experience, combined
  • Customizable alerts of changes in relevant policies and trends
  • Search and navigate Q&As to find answers to your specific questions
  • Filter by article, discussion, analysis and more to find the exact information you’re looking for
  • Continually updated to bring you the latest reports, trending topics, and coverage analysis