The panel essentially ruled that the policy was consistent with the MVFRL because that statute places the burden of making sure a driver is insured on the vehicle owner, and not upon the insurance companies.
The court rejected the Plaintiff’s argument that Safe Auto’s
provision violated the mandate of the MVFRL of having an owner ensure that all
drivers are covered by insurance. The
court noted that the MVFRL does not require a shifting of the burden to the insurance
companies to discover the identities of resident, non-family member insureds
who may have access to an insured’s vehicle.
Rather, the court felt that that burden was more appropriately placed in
the hands of the insured.
The Majority Opinion written by Judge Dubow can be viewed HERE.
The Dissenting Opinion by Judge Ford Elliott can be viewed HERE.
Source: Article “Superior Court Rules Unlisted Resident Driver Exclusion is Okay” by Max Mitchell. The Legal Intelligencer (September 22, 2017).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.