car rental cork airport

On the other hand, it is the position of the car rental companies, unless there is a specific state law provides the contrary, there is no rule that a lessor extend insurance coverage to its lessee, the separate and adequate insurance coverage. zl The rental car companies argue that if a tenant has confirmed adequate coverage under the state statutory scheme and is to purchase additional liability protection from the lease, there is no other available or collectible insurance present to the operators of the other insurance clause, and therefore the operator should be primary coverage.

V.

LAW

Most Popular Articles in Reference
The importance of understanding organizational culture
Credit card attitudes and behaviors of college students
What factors attract foreign direct investment will be?
Libraries need relationship marketing - marketing concept of mutual interest, ...
How to monitor performance goals: employee reviews are more than criticism
More »

Display

An examination of relevant case law shows that the position of the car rental company has the most support in the courts, which deal with this issue. The cases show that where a special statutory scheme does not require a commercial car rental companies, the insurance to his tenants, there is no reason to ask to double insurance protection.22

It should be noted, however, that the arguments provided by rental car companies have not gained acceptance in the whole entire country. Unlike the majority, a small number of states, in fact, a certain expansion of insurance to the tenant, regardless of secondary liability provision that they signed.23 in those states, courts have been quite clear that the shift of primary responsibility of trying by rental car companies through the secondary liability concept can not be completed in accordance with the statutory scheme on the lease.

To illustrate, the case law is divided into two categories. The first focuses on states, which tend to offer car owners protection in the use of secondary liability. The second group focuses on States, mandate, by statute, that a tenant is covered by insurance provided by a car and are not sympathetic to secondary liability.

A. Secondary Liability States

It seems there are now some fourteen states, which at the forefront of maintaining the secondary liability in leases: California, Missouri, Connecticut, Georgia, Hawaii, Florida, Illinois, Wisconsin, Nevada, New York, New Jersey, Colorado, Vermont, and Utah. For clarity's sake, the present status of the right of every State will, in turn.

1. California

In one of the recent cases involving the question whether a rental car company, could primary liability to the tenant about the conditions of the tenancy agreement, California Court of Appeals in Mercury Casualty Co. v. Hertz Corp., 24 confirmed a second provision in liability one of the Hertz rental agreement. The issue in Mercury was the validity of a secondary liability provision that the car rental companies insulated from liability from negligence of the lessee. It shifted the same for the tenants and their insurance company, if the tenant no additional insurance, the car company.25