You'll have to check what the jurisdictional limit of the small claims court is now, but I'm pretty sure it was $10,000 last time I checked.
One very tiny point of addition. I work small claims court cases in LA County as part of my job and there "Small Claims Court handles Civil cases asking for $7,500.00 or less" with entities having a maximum of $5,000.
https://www.lasuperiorcourt.org/smallclaims/ui/whatis.aspx
Thanks for the correction, Doug. Just proves I'm getting senile to have substituted an amount I think is required for what it really is. And best of luck, fun and safety to you in the IBR!
The insurance situation is that when you loan or give permission to another person to drive any vehicle you own, you assume "vicarious liability" for their actions, any damage to your vehicle, any damage to other vehicles or property and any medical liabilities that result from their actions. Unlike a rental company, you have presumably not assigned liability to them by contract. In California if you loan a car, your insurance is liable for everything that happens.
Not exactly, Tom. The first distinction to keep in mind is that between liability coverage (aka PL & PD) in which your insurance pays a third party for injuries or property damage, and the pure indemnification in which your insurance pays for damages sustained to your vehicle (collision coverage is at issue in this case). The second distinction is that (as you've stated) personal liability (i.e., for your own negligence) and the insurer's contractual liability to pay per its contract are not always congruent. Typically, at least in the case of liability coverage and assuming it is of a nature that is within other policy requirements, personal liability triggers the insurer's duty to indemnify.
Unless this has changed since I was doing this regularly, the statutory vicarious personal liability of the registered owner is fixed at the dollar amount set as the minimum required auto liability limits (still 15K/30K??), whether or not you have actually insured your car. (BTW, this is the main reason to make sure you notify the DMV upon selling a car, since it still attaches if you're their registered owner until such notice is given.) You can also have vicarious personal liability if you negligently entrusted your vehicle to someone -- usually where you knew or should have known that the person was not capable of safely operating it (e.g., has no MC endorsement or no license, is intoxicated, is known to have had many instances of negligent operation, etc.) There's more circumstances, but none are apparently applicable here.
The only applicable collision coverage is Jeff's, in which the issue of whether Brian is an insured (under the omnibus clause??) on Jeff's policy is irrelevant. We seem to be venturing into that next issue -- whether Brian is "an insured" for liability purposes to Jeff on Jeff's policy and/or on his own policy, and which policy is primary and which is secondary.
Without researching it, I think I know the answer, but it relies upon my recollection of a couple typical policy clauses, so what I should say is that I have conflicting recollections relevant to what would be the result in these circumstances. After reconsidering a shoot from the hip answer, I decided to delete several paragraphs . . . having decided that almost no one would read it anyway. Tom, you're really into a complex subject, and it's just too nice outside today, so I'm getting off this keyboard before it's gone. Sorry about that brick wall situation. As you know, much of this crap ends up the subject of extended negotiations, largely about the cost of litigation as a counterbalance to what can be gained IF you win, and IF you can collect. So it's not always a reliable indicator of what the statutory and case law says or what the result might be if the cost of litigation wasn't the biggest elephant in the room.
I just hope Brian steps up and does the right thing.
