DUI crash..will insurance pay?

The other night my husband was driving us home from a dinner with family, when he drove off the road and into a ditch at 50+mph. We are both uninjured, but I can’t say the same about our car. It’s pretty messed up, possibly even totalled. Well, to make a long story short my husband was given a breathalizer and blew a .11, the legal limit is .08. He had 3 glasses of wine with dinner.

My question is this:

Will our insurance pay for the damage to our car? We have full coverage with Farmer’s and we also have gap insurance on the loan, which is good because we still owe more than the car is worth.

I’m glad no one else was involved and the only thing we have to worry about is the cost of the damage to our car, but I don’t know how insurance will handle this.

Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

Yes in the US, you will be covered. The unfortunate part is your insurance company will either dump you or spike your rates to an amazing degree for obvious reasons if convicted.

Glad you all are okay and no one hurt.

If the car is totaled and husband found guilty I would suggest getting a low insurance replacement car(ask insurer) that you can pay cash for(used) and put only liability on it. The DUI clears off your isurance record eventually, not sure when though.

It SHOULD cover your damage…but as Andrew said…expect your insurance to double or even triple. A accident with a DUI is NOT good. You’re lucky he wasn’t arrested.

The unfortunate part is your insurance company will either dump you or spike your rates to an amazing degree for obvious reasons if convicted.

If convicted, your rates may go up. If convicted and if you make a claim, your rates will go equally up, in most cases.

I have had three claims in about 45 years against my insurance for accidents where I was driving. In no case did my rates go up. two of them were single car accidents. I have had the same insurance company all that time. Your rates may go up or not. If you have had many years with that company, and otherwise a good history, one such accident is not likely to increase your rates.

Personally I am happy they use that system It means that safer drivers like me enjoy lower rates and those who are more likely to have accidents will pay their fair share.

That said, there are differences in insurance companies and some use this kind of event to profit the company.

How your company company reacts (and your driving abilities and habits) should tell you a lot about rather you should consider staying with them or moving on to another company.

I would not try to avoid telling your insurance company by not making a serious claim. If it was only a couple of hundred dollars, I might not bother with the claim.

I have never had a DUI, but if you are convicted for that, you can expect any insurance company to not be very happy. It is not the accident, but a DUI that will get you. Some insurance companies go easy on the first one, but don’t expect it, and certainly don’t expect it twice.

Look at the stipulations of your insurance policy. Some insurance companies will not cover damages if the vehicle is used illegally on a public road or in the act of commiting a crime.


Dig out the policy and read it. Any disclaimers should be in there.

Based on blowing an .11 he should consider himself lucky it’s a DUI and not a DWI.
The latter is far more serious.

I, like Mr. Meehan, know in Ohio, when you get a DUI you get special plates that are yellow with red lettering. I’m pretty sure special insurance is also required as well after the DUI. Not really sure on the last bit, but I’ve heard a few things on it.

I think the terminology in the statutes varies from state to state. In many states it’s all under DUI including any other form of controlled drug.

Could be. In Oklahoma even one sip of wine puts you in the DUI category. DWI is at or in excess of .08 and many times the DWIs are plea bargained down to DUIs.

Now about our ex-State Insurance Comissioner who has been nailed for DWI several times (once while in office) and never jailed…

MB is right…Some states use to have DWI…and dropped it for the DUI. The DWI (driving while intoxicated) didn’t really apply when you were high on cocaine.

One more thing you can do: you can have your husband listed as an “excluded driver” on your insurance policy (or at least, try to). Then, he does NOT drive the vehicle. Ask your insurance agent.

you should call your insurance agent. ask them these questions. they will give you the truth.

they aren’t going to ‘be mean to you, or criticize you’ for asking these questions.

this is what they are in business for.

a few thoughts: in some states while someone is convicted or under investigation for dui your vehicle registrations are suspended until the case is resolved. if the vehicles are in his name this may mean you will have no vehicle to use. if you own multiple vehicles; if the auto is in both your names, you may want to put it into just your name. and if your hubby does get convicted of dui then he must be listed as an excluded operator (meaning he is not allowed to operate it at all) on your vehicle, and the insurance wont go up for your car. BUT the insurance for his car will go way up(this is assuming he will be allowed to drive anyway.)

“Yes in the US, you will be covered.” Not necessarily. In Colorado, for example, the insurance company is not required to cover damage to your vehicle if you were breaking the law at the time. Such as in this case. Hope your state is different, but you need to check the insurance reguolations in your state.

That’s a great idea. It sounds to me like he shouldn’t be driving anyway.

Friend in CA. was right at the .08 limit,it was reduced to a “wet reckless”.He weighs 245 and it was 3 12 oz beers in a hour,no accident involved (was speeding)

I would be careful about taking that last bit of advice. In some jurisdictions, there are severe penalties for refusing to take the test- almost as bad as failing it IMO.

I am guessing you have never lost a loved one to a drunk driver. I know a young girl who lost her mother to a drunk driver and I have a friend who lost his father to a drunk driver. I find your effort to characterize this lapse in judgement as an innocent mistake offensive.

It would have been so easy to say “No thanks, I will be driving later.” It would have been so easy to wait a couple of hours to allow the alcohol to be matabolized before driving. It would have been so easy to call a taxi cab. Think of all the money and headaches calling a taxi would have saved.

These limits are not arbitrary numbers set to increase revenue for the government. They are set and revised to save lives and protect the innocent from idiots who would rather pay a lawyer $5,000 than pay a cab driver $80. These limits have been set and lowered on behalf of everyone who has lost a loved one to a drunk driver. That is anything but “arbitrary.”

At least where I live, every driver’s license has printed on it “Operation of a motor vehicle constitutes consent to any sobriety test required by law.” Instead of telling the OP to refuse the brethalyzer, why not recommend the OP behave like a responsible adult? I think that would be a lot wiser.

The next time you open your mouth, think about what you are about to say before you say it.

In many states, if you refuse to take a Breathalyzer test, it is a “presumptive positive” result for being over the limit on alcohol. In other words, if you refuse the test, you are automatically charged with DUI. The concept apparently is along the lines of…if you have nothing to hide, then you should not have an issue about submitting to the test.

And, I agree with Ron-man. The BAC levels are not arbitary and are set at their current levels to–hopefully–save the lives of innocent people. Far too many people in this country have died because of the selfish and irresponsible actions of intoxicated people who chose to drive rather than acting in a responsible, adult manner. I don’t think that I am alone in my belief that packer rich has given very bad advice.

Under OK law, refusing to consent to a breath or blood test is supposed to mean automatic revocation of the drivers license.

Apparently this law does not apply to the powers that be; city councilman stopped for drunk driving, ex-State Ins. Commissioner who refused, or the U.S. District Attorney who was driving a black Lincoln late at night with the lights off, going the wrong way on a divided highway while drunk on his rear, and who also refused to cooperate.

A friend of mine on a motorcycle was hit head-on by the latter, tossed about 125 feet through the air, and spent several months in the hospital. Not one thing was ever done to the U.S. attorney.

You sound very angry, and I’m sorry if friends of yours have lost people they care about. It does sound like the guy made a mistake to me… it’s not like he slammed a fifth of Jack and decided to drive, assuming the truth is being told. Anyone can have a lapse of judgment. How about some tolerance? Someday you may make a mistake and be called on it. And I have lost a friend to a drunk driver, fyi. Sounds like an expensive mistake that that he won’t be making again. It’s the multiple repeat offenders that really make me sick.

The advice “think about what you are about to say before you say it” applies to everyone, I think. You need only look at what’s been happening in the Middle East for thousands of years to see the results of only seeing life in black and white.