Man Avoids 37 Speed Camera Tickets By Wearing Monkey Mask

[ellenbetty]

Here in the US, in most states, in civil court, the owner of the car is legally responsible for damages for any accident caused by any driver of the car, if the owner lent the vehicle or if the owner gave the vehicle as a gift to another person. Basicly loaning a car or giving the car as a gift, is the same a aiding and abetting in any crime commited by your vehicle. The person who paid for the vehicle is responsible for anything done with the vehicle. Selling the vehicle for a $1 will not avoid responsiblity for civil liability.

[kustom play]

Originally Posted by ellenbetty

Here in the US, in most states, in civil court, the owner of the car is legally responsible for damages for any accident caused by any driver of the car, if the owner lent the vehicle or if the owner gave the vehicle as a gift to another person. Basicly loaning a car or giving the car as a gift, is the same a aiding and abetting in any crime commited by your vehicle. The person who paid for the vehicle is responsible for anything done with the vehicle. Selling the vehicle for a $1 will not avoid responsiblity for civil liability.

totally wrong on so many levels

the person whos in control of the car would be at fault. If your car is insured and you lend the car to somebody the insurance follows the car. Your insurnace company could go after there insurance company if they want but that doesnt involve you. If you loan the car to somebody who has no insurance then you uninsured driver insurance covers it. If you dont have then then your stupid and shouldnt be driving.

if you loan somebody your car and they kill somebody your not at fault unless they told you they planed to kill somebody with your car. LOL at aiding and abetting, I think you need to look more into that lol.

This is the reason why they cant arrest the guy with the monkey mask, cant prove the driver. They blew up the story here how he was going to get arrested for this only to find they have nothing to arrest him on. It made DPS (our state police) look like idiots.

[tomato]

Originally Posted by ellenbetty

Here in the US, in most states, in civil court, the owner of the car is legally responsible for damages for any accident caused by any driver of the car, if the owner lent the vehicle or if the owner gave the vehicle as a gift to another person. Basicly loaning a car or giving the car as a gift, is the same a aiding and abetting in any crime commited by your vehicle. The person who paid for the vehicle is responsible for anything done with the vehicle. Selling the vehicle for a $1 will not avoid responsiblity for civil liability.

I'm pretty sure you're correct in California (the bold part of your statement at least) For example, if I want to sell my car and I let people drive it around, and let's say one guy driving my car around gets into an accident, I, as the owner of the car, can be held liable for damages he caused. That's the way I understand it.

The fact that he may have insurance and I may have insurance is secondary, I think, ultimately the owner is liable, that's why it's so important to sign the Release of Liability form and file it with the DMV ASAP when you sell your car.

(I could be wrong, of course, but this is what I understand from reading the DMV of California's info ).

Now, infractions caused by a different driver are a different story, and I'm not clear on that, that's why I asked. My understanding was that only parking tickets could be tracked back to the owner of the car, but not driving infractions.