OT - When does a rental car become a stolen vehicle?

[trader4]

xactly what I said it covers in my OP.

I authorize to drive either of those vehicles. It extends to coverage of re= ntal vehicles. Since it extends to rental vehicles, it automatically extend= s to any driver that I authorize to drive the rental.

Good enough for me.

vehicle per the rental contract.

ey tell me that there may be legal problems with the coverage should an una= uthorized driver get in an accident.

even though any driver that I authorize to drive any covered vehicle would = be covered, I may not have the right to authorize drivers to drive the rent= al. If only the rental company can authorize additional operators, then the= Ins Co could refuse to cover a driver that is not listed on the contract.

son why the Ins Co says to make sure that all drivers are listed on the con= tract. It can't be monetary because not only don't they make any money when= the drivers are listed, they are actually putting themselves "at risk" sin= ce they are telling me to do something that could end up costing them money= .

, by making sure that I don't get myself in trouble from a legal non-covera= ge perspective.

And we had one example so far of what potentially could happen. That being an unauthorized driver could be stopped by the cops during a traffic stop or accident and unable to show a rental agreement with their name on it, they might wind up having the car impounded, detained, etc.

Other than that, as I can't see any other material legal risk that you would be at. Also, consider that the contract the rental company uses is the same whether you take out optional insurance with them or not. Now,if you did take out THEIR insurance and then allowed an unauthorized person to drive the car, then I think we can all see the clear legal risk, in that the rental company then would have a good and valid reason to say the insurance did not cover them.

[trader4]

Everything you listed can happen with or without the extra driver being listed on the rental contract. And whether the driver was listed or not, unless the renter took out insurance with the rental car company their position is going to be the same. You or someone you let drive the car wrecked it and killed the other people. You, the renter are responsible to us for the cost of the car and we the rental company are not responsible for the damages to the other parties. So, again, I don't see any monetary loss to the rental company that is different because the renter did not add the additional driver.

[trader4]

And I think you obviously have not rented many cars. Every rental company I have used requires that additional drivers be listed and they charge a daily fee. The majors, eg Hertz, Avis, Enterprise all do it. So, instead of Derby, maybe you should go talk to some rental companies.

And I understand Derby's point about his corporate discount not making it worthwhile to go find another company. I don't think he could find a rental company on this green earth that says they don't care if additional drivers are listed or not. And even if they did, the chance that they are going to have a deal that is better than just taking the corp rate with the rental company he has and paying the few extra bucks to add the drivers is slim.

For years I rented cars with a Fortune

100 company that used Hertz. The rate which was also available when I rented a car for myself, was so good that it wasn't worth the time and trouble to screw around finding the special deal of the day to maybe save a few bucks. Plus with Hertz, I was a gold customer. The car was waiting with keys in it. I did not even have to go into the office. Just find my name on an electronic board and get the stall number the car was sitting in just a few feet away. After getting off a 6 hour plane ride, that is a very big benefit to me..... As is the rental company being right at the airport most of the time, not a bus ride 2 miles away.

They also had other innovations that other companies did not, at least back then. Like being able to pay for a tank of gas when picking up the car and then bringing it back near empty. They charged a fair price for the gas if you bought it that way, about the same as the local street price. So, if I expected to use nearly a tank or more, I always took out that option. Again, a nice convenience not having to worry about filling up a rental car when returning to the airport.

[DerbyDad03]

The point is that you can't just let anyone drive the rental just by handing them the keys and expect the rental agency not to care. They want to know who will be operating the vehicle that they own. If it was your car wouldn't you want to know who was driving it?

Obviously if the renter was incapacitated they would probably give you some leeway, even with an unlicensed driver, but it would be their choice. It still wouldn't make it legal from a contract perspective.

No, what I have is the best rate and mileage available to me so there is no need for me to call anyone else. If i want that rate along with the unlimited miles, i have to play by their rules. Besides, as others have said, I doubt I can find a rental agency that wouldn't require me to list additional drivers.

In addition, when I was talking to my Ins Co, there was no mention of which rental agency I was using. That tells me the the situation is the same across all rental agencies.

[clare]

what I said it covers in my OP.

authorize to drive either of those vehicles. It extends to coverage of rental vehicles. Since it extends to rental vehicles, it automatically extends to any driver that I authorize to drive the rental.

vehicle per the rental contract.

tell me that there may be legal problems with the coverage should an unauthorized driver get in an accident.

though any driver that I authorize to drive any covered vehicle would be covered, I may not have the right to authorize drivers to drive the rental. If only the rental company can authorize additional operators, then the Ins Co could refuse to cover a driver that is not listed on the contract.

why the Ins Co says to make sure that all drivers are listed on the contract. It can't be monetary because not only don't they make any money when the drivers are listed, they are actually putting themselves "at risk" since they are telling me to do something that could end up costing them money.

making sure that I don't get myself in trouble from a legal non-coverage perspective. You need to LIST the drivers. You do not need to insure them. You do NOT want ANY of their insurance, or your "non-ownwd vehicle" insurance does NOT cover you. You need to REFUSE their extended coverage.

In most cases, at least "up here" there is no extra charge for an additional listed driver over 25 if you are not buying insurance. Not sure about under 25, as I have not been in tha position for quite a few years - kids both grown up.

[clare]

My last 2 rentals were in europe, and there was no extra charge for additional adult drivers, who just needed to be named at the time of vehicle pickup. MY insurance was the only policy in effect on the one and no deductible total coverage was included on the other - along with no mileage limit - but the island was not very big! (Tennerife)

[Doug]

Or they didn't know so they wouldn't say??? Seems to me you're asking for legal advice and should seek a lawyer if it really worries you that much or just do as the car rental said authorize in writing the other drivers and that ends your worries.

Also just a heads up but if you ask your insurance agent a question and they don't know, ask them to ask their underwriters.

[DerbyDad03]

We know that.

That's part of the issue. My sons are not named on my policy.

It would not be the Ins Co claiming it was "stolen", it would be the rental agency. At that point the Ins Co *could* say "The operator at the time is not our customer and he was not authorized by the rental company to operate the vehicle that our customer contracted, therefore we are not going to cover the incident.

[DerbyDad03]

You need to stop telling things that I already know.

No where in this thread is there any indication that I am buying the insurance from the rental agency. This whole thread has only been about the question of whether or not *my* insurance company will cover an operator that is not listed on the rental contract.

I'll repeat what I said in my OP: *My* insurance company has told me that from a policy perspective, all operators would be covered but that there might be *legal* ramifications related to that coverage if the drivers are not listed on the rental contract. Those (unspecified) legal ramifications may render the coverage from *my* insurance company void.

That's why I say that my insurance company is protecting me by telling me to:

1 - Refuse the rental agency insurance coverage since I'm covered through them. 2 - Make sure all drivers are listed so that there will be no "legal" problems with my insurance company covering an incident.

As noted earlier in this thread, there is a charge from the rental agency ($3) for each additional operator, regardless of age. There is an additional charge of $15 for operators between 20 and 24, $41 for operators under 20.

[Doug]

No, this is from a guy who has a lot experience with insurance agents in other matters !!!!!

[Evan]

Yes, the legal reason is that you as the contracted (rental) user of the vehicle do not have legal authority to determine who can and can not use the vehicle, only its owner, the rental company can do that...

That is why all persons who will or could be driving the rental vehicle should be listed as additional authorized operators... There are different laws in different states but since you are not the legal registered owner of the vehicle your decisions and directives as far as who can use it are meaningless...

It is a crime of varying severity to be operating a motor vehicle without authority and connected to it are various offenses such as uninsured operation of a motor vehicle -- as if you are not authorized by the owner to operate it and have no proof available at the scene of the accident/traffic stop to prove you have specific insurance coverage for that driver on that vehicle it is big trouble...

The police can impound the car since if they come upon it involved in an accident or stop it for a traffic offense and it is ot being operated by an authorized user as described on the contract then it is evidence related to the criminal infractions and why would the police want to allow the authorized operator (even if they were present) the continued ability to commit additional fraud against the owner...

[Evan]

There is a difference between being the registered owner of a vehicle with a financial lien against its title (i.e. why a financing company would be involved) which would be entirely a civil matter unless some intent to defraud the financing company could be proven against the registered owner of said vehicle...

And the situation where you are merely a contracted user of a vehicle owned by someone else (the rental company)... The police can refuse to allow you to retake possession of such a vehicle after a traffic stop or accident (in both situations your vehicle is considered to be seized by the police during the duration of the incident unless and until the police release custody of it back to the legal owner or someone the legal owner designates) and why would the police trust an authorized user of a rental car who allowed someone not authorized to operate the vehicle and it was either involved in a traffic accident or violated traffic laws to continue to be honest and only allow the authorized users to operate it when the fact that it was stopped or crashed with someone else driving it say otherwise... Impound and allow the legal owner to come collect it is the typical police mindset on such things...

[DerbyDad03]

Obviously you haven't read this thread very carefully. I have already said that I am planning to authorize and pay for additional drivers.

Everything else in this thread has been nothing more than a lively discussion. Why would I possibly need to talk a lawyer? To save a few bucks on car rental? Gimme a break.

Obviously you haven't read this thread very carefully. In every post I have used the terms Ins Co or insurance company. I have not been talking to an agent. As a matter of fact I was talking to at least a 2nd level representative of my Ins Co customer service department. 1st level was not sure of the answer and said "Hang on while I get in touch with someone knowledgable in that area." I am very confident that the person I spoke to was knowledgable with regards to my coverage as it applies to rental vehicles. For all I know I _was_ talking to an underwriter.

[Evan]

Once you violate the terms of the contract (by allowing an non-listed driver to operate it) the vehicle is not covered by any of your own supplemental insurance from your own policy because you allowed it to be used in an improper way in breach of the covenant of agreement for its use known as the rental contract... Your insurer can drop your coverage for issues like that because your choice to breach a contract or law was willful and not considered "normally acceptable use"... Just the same way your insurer can cancel your policy or refuse to pay out on claims if you operate your own vehicles with expired registration tags or an invalid inspection sticker because both of those conditions are not legal uses of the vehicle under just about every motor vehicle law in every state on public roadways...

It is not a "claim for violation of the contract" it is ANY claim made, as the instant you breach the contract you VOID your supposed insurance coverages...

What losses does the rental company have if a non-listed non-authorized driver gets into an accident with one of their vehicles ? Umm... The rental income which that vehicle would bring in from other renters using it during the duration of the repairs and any impoundment by authorities during an investigation... That has a value to it that the unauthorized use and subsequent damage has deprived the rental company of and due to your willful breach of contract that is but one of the "losses" you have caused the rental company...

[clare]

OK. Not to be ignorant or anything, but what's your question? Register all drivers 25 or older with the rental company, and no drivers under 25 get the keys. Simple.

[Evan]

xactly what I said it covers in my OP.

I authorize to drive either of those vehicles. It extends to coverage of re= ntal vehicles. Since it extends to rental vehicles, it automatically extend= s to any driver that I authorize to drive the rental.

vehicle per the rental contract.

ey tell me that there may be legal problems with the coverage should an una= uthorized driver get in an accident.

even though any driver that I authorize to drive any covered vehicle would = be covered, I may not have the right to authorize drivers to drive the rent= al. If only the rental company can authorize additional operators, then the= Ins Co could refuse to cover a driver that is not listed on the contract.

son why the Ins Co says to make sure that all drivers are listed on the con= tract. It can't be monetary because not only don't they make any money when= the drivers are listed, they are actually putting themselves "at risk" sin= ce they are telling me to do something that could end up costing them money= .

, by making sure that I don't get myself in trouble from a legal non-covera= ge perspective.

Bullshit... Period...

Since you are not the legal owner of any rental vehicle you lack legal authority to choose who can and can not use it... Period...

Contract law governs the rest, IF you breach the terms of the rental agreement by allowing anyone other than the users listed on the contract by the rental company THEN your insurer is not legally required to pay for your fraudulent and unauthorized use of the vehicle... It is NOT yours, you do not own it like you do your specifically identified and covered vehicles listed on your auto policy...

That seems to be where your disconnect is...

Your car =3D you can decide who can drive it under the terms and limitations of your insurance policy...

Rental car =3D you have no legal authority beyond the use of the car within the terms of the contract, your insurance will not magically pay out on a claim for a driver who is not listed on the rental contract even if that person is covered to operate vehicles which you own because their operation of the rental was in breach of the terms of the rental contract...

The rental contract has to list the authorized operators as well as the insurance information so that you have that contract as a "registration document" and "proof of insurance" for those allowed to use the vehicle on your possession and in the vehicle at all times during your use...

Lose that contract and in addition to "unauthorized use of a motor vehicle" you would also be operating a vehicle "unregistered/uninsured" as you have nothing in your possession or in the car which states that you have authority to operate the vehicle in your possession nor that you have any documents indicating proper insurance coverage...

As far as your insurance policy coverage extending to anyone and everyone you desire, no way, a casual user who drives your car once or twice in a year is one thing, but you can not allow someone regular use of your vehicle without providing their information to your insurance provider and that can effect the price of your policy...

Again, you would know it if you had a fleet vehicle policy where the listing of specifically approved users for each covered vehicle would be impractical as the patterns of use change daily and authority is granted by one's status as an employee with a valid driver's license and clean driver's history... Those cost a lot of money, you would know it for sure if you had such a policy...

[Evan]

-

ar or truck, the

allow anyone other

breach that contract if

age on a rental car only

Because having the driver properly listed on the rental agreement would be obeying the terms of the contract... Once you breach them you are in a grey area where even if one of the insurance companies does pay out for something they can come after you for repayment because your choice to breach the contract caused the loss...

[Evan]

Don't rely on your insurance coverage amounts complying with the laws in other states...

It is one thing to operate your vehicle registered in compliance with your states' laws elsewhere, but a rental car might not be registered in your state or even where you are purchasing the rental insurance... Why take the risk that your insurance amounts are insufficient to comply with the laws where you are travelling -- as improper insurance coverage (or not being insured at all) are crimes...

[clare]

exactly what I said it covers in my OP.

authorize to drive either of those vehicles. It extends to coverage of rental vehicles. Since it extends to rental vehicles, it automatically extends to any driver that I authorize to drive the rental.

vehicle per the rental contract.

tell me that there may be legal problems with the coverage should an unauthorized driver get in an accident.

though any driver that I authorize to drive any covered vehicle would be covered, I may not have the right to authorize drivers to drive the rental. If only the rental company can authorize additional operators, then the Ins Co could refuse to cover a driver that is not listed on the contract.

why the Ins Co says to make sure that all drivers are listed on the contract. It can't be monetary because not only don't they make any money when the drivers are listed, they are actually putting themselves "at risk" since they are telling me to do something that could end up costing them money.

making sure that I don't get myself in trouble from a legal non-coverage perspective.

We lent my daughter's boyfriend our "extra" vehicle for a couple of weeks after his car was stolen, and his rental coverage was used up waiting for setlement. When it stretched out to a month we added him as primary driver on that vehicle - for $189 per year. (it's coming up

4 months now - still no settlement)

Fleet policy is not required for 3 vehicles and 4 or 5 drivers if they are part of a single household or family - and "fleet" doesn't necessarily cover a rental or "unowned vehicle". And a "casual" driver does not need to be listed on the policy - you CAN lend your car to your neighbour or friend for a day without having them added to your policy.

At least in Ontario - I cannot speak for USA or elsewhere.

[DerbyDad03]

There never really was a question. I was simply pointing out what I was told by my Ins Co and the rental agency regarding coverage for authorized vs. non-authorized drivers as a means to start what I knew would be a lively discussion.

Who I choose to list and pay for is totally up to me and not really related to this discussion.