At-fault accident in someone else's car, but car was not damaged

Question

Recently, my wife was involved in an accident that was (likely) her fault. She and I are both insured drivers. She was driving her Grandfather's car at the time. From what I understand, his insurance would have to cover the accident in most cases.

The situation is complicated by the fact that her Grandfather's car was not actually damaged in any way, nor did it come in contact at any point with any other car. She entered another driver's right of way, which caused that driver to react and damage their car.

Our insurance insists that Grandfather's insurance must be used. Grandfather refuses to turn over his insurance information, as his car wasn't actually damaged.

Our insurance is saying that they will not pay for the damage, and it seems the other party's insurance is saying the same.

What can we expect from this situation?

Answer 1

Car insurance usually follows the car. Therefore if the involved car was used with permission, that policy would cover liability (up to the limits, then the driver's insurance would cover remaining liability). Missouri is a fault state, meaning that the party at fault is liable. The car plates lead to the VIN, and insurance coverage includes the VIN, so the authorities just need to search the Missouri insurance database to find out who issues the insurance, and being obstinate about providing this information is not a productive way to avoid the inevitable outcome that Grandfather's insurance may have to pay (assuming your analysis of fault).

Missouri is a comparative fault state, meaning that if you as the injured driver were partly at fault, your ability to recover from the other party is correspondingly reduced. From your description, it is highly unlikely that your wife would be found entirely at fault, but perhaps she will be found to be a bit at fault.