3 ms·
But as the article said, that liability may not be covered by that person's vehicle insurance in British Columbia > In the recent incident in Richmond, thankfu
by Someone1234 7y ago
But as the article said, that liability may not be covered by that person's vehicle insurance in British Columbia
> In the recent incident in Richmond, thankfully, there was no accident. Had an accident occurred, the vehicle owner's insurance may not have provided coverage.
I don't think anyone disagrees that the vehicle's driver is liable (regardless of physically being in the vehicle or using summon). The issue here seems to be if that is legal at all and if it is legal if insurance would cover that liability.
Plus what happens if a third party activates summon, for example a toddler? Is the toddler now legal liable for any accidents? Is the owner of the car? Is the child's parent/guardian (even if they weren't physically there)? Lots of interesting legal edge cases to explore.
- p2t2p 7y ago> regardless of physically being in the vehicle or using summon) Imagine you're driving along the road, see a pedestrian crossing and see a pedestrian on it. You hit the brake but brake doesn't work, because of the manufacturing flaw (later one they will issue a recall but not just yet) so you hit someone. I think it is pretty obvious that manufacturer of the car is liable in this case. Although you still get into trouble, all the investigation, courts, etc. > Plus what happens if a third party activates summon, for example a toddler. In Australia, in NSW, you're responsible if you didn't take the precautions necessary and someone, who's not supposed to drive your car, gains access to it. Like if you left your windows/doors open and/or car keys in the car or engine running and someone without licenses got inside and drove it, there is a fine.