No-Fault State My understanding is that insurance travels with the car.

Therefore, this is the example
Driver1Car1 100k liability
Driver2Car2 300k liability
  • Car1 hits car2.

  • Car1 driver 100% at fault.

  • Car2 driver has 200k "damages".

  • Therefore, Car1 insurance will pay out to driver2 100k.

  • Car1 driver has 500k damages.

  • As driver1 was found to be 100% fault, neither car1 or car2 liability comes into play?

  • What insurance would car1 driver need to help with damages (lost wages, medical bills, pain and suffering, etc)? This is where Car1Driver1 PIP comes into play? Driver1's health insurance would also pay?

1 Answer 1


You said no fault state. That is key.

Up to the (state-dependent) limits of no-fault, Party 1's insurance pays Party 1's damages, Party 2's insurance pays Party 2's damages.

Both drivers would make a claim against their own PIP and collision policies. You don't deal with the other party.

Only if the damage exceeds the limits of no-fault, then could Driver 2 sue Driver 1, and in that case, Driver 1's residual liability insurance, umbrella policy, or similar would pay.

The percentage fault may determine the deductible and will determine future premium increases, but does not change the insurance policy responsible.

  • I have a difficult time accepting this answer. The reason is that why would I need supplemental uninsured motorist coverage if my insurance will be paying me regardless.
    – paulj
    Oct 29, 2023 at 10:32
  • Actually, I believe I need to ask a more detailed question. I see pain and suffering is handled differently from medical expenses and lost wages.
    – paulj
    Oct 29, 2023 at 10:57
  • @paulj If the other motorist is uninsured, then your own PIP may not pay without uninsured motorist coverage. The first reason is that with no-fault, the insurance company wins some (by not having to pay others' damages) and loses some (by paying you when not at fault) and those cases average out. If the other party is uninsured, the company doesn't have the chance of "winning", so they shouldn't "lose" either. It's all about averaging. Other case is when you're driving out-of-state or get into a crash with an out-of-state driver, the system may revert to traditional fault-based tort.
    – user71659
    Oct 29, 2023 at 19:07

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .