Permissive Driver Issue
QUESTION:
We have
a situation where a 16-year-old boy was driving his 16-year-old girlfriend’s
vehicle with her permission. They were at school and he asked to borrow it to
run to the gas station for a soda. She told him that as long as he put gasoline
in it, he could. As he was leaving the gas station, he ran a red light and
collided with out insured. He was deemed 100% at fault.
The
boyfriend driver has driven that particular vehicle on a few occasions
(approximately 4-5 times). When he was driving it one time, the girlfriend’s
mother saw him and told him he was not to be driving the vehicle. On another
occasion, both the girlfriend’s mother and father told both the kids that the
boyfriend was not to be driving the vehicle. This vehicle is exclusively used
by the girlfriend, but registered under the parents’ name.
Again,
on this particular day, the girlfriend gave the keys to her boyfriend and told
him he could borrow her vehicle. The insurance carrier for the owner of the
vehicle (girlfriend’s parents) has denied the claim due to non-permissive
users. The insurance carrier for the boyfriend (driver) has also denied the
claim to the innocent third party insured citing the same exclusion.
My
question is, since the girlfriend is considered an insured under her father’s
policy (family member) and she gave permission to the boyfriend to drive the
vehicle, would he have a reasonable belief that he could drive it, even when
the girlfriend’s mom and dad told him he was not to drive it?
ANSWER:
Even though the girl gave her
boyfriend permission to drive the vehicle, he had been told on two separate
occasions by the owners/parents that he was not to drive the vehicle;
therefore, he had no reasonable belief that he could drive the vehicle. The
owner of the vehicle gets to determine who has permission to drive it, even
though the normal user of the vehicle may be someone else. In this situation
it’s quite clear that the parents did not want him driving the vehicle. They
made that clear on more than one occasion. Therefore, there is no coverage for
the loss.
