What follows are our general observations and opinions. It is not legal advice, it is not a definitive statement of California law, and every situation depends on its own facts.
The question we are asked most often after a rideshare crash in Los Angeles is simply: who pays? The answer, as we read California’s rideshare insurance scheme, depends almost entirely on what the driver was doing at the moment of the collision — specifically, what the app said. The same driver in the same car can be covered by three very different layers of insurance depending on whether the app was off, on and waiting, or engaged with a ride.
In short: if the driver had accepted a ride or had a passenger in the car, a one million dollar third-party liability layer under the rideshare company’s policy is generally in play. If the app was on but no ride had been accepted, a much smaller contingent layer applies. If the app was off, it is an ordinary car accident against the driver’s personal policy — and personal auto policies commonly exclude commercial ridesharing, which is where coverage gaps appear.
The three periods, in plain terms
California’s framework for transportation network companies is set out in the Public Utilities Code, and our reading of it produces three distinct windows:
- App off. The driver is a private motorist. Only the personal auto policy responds, subject to whatever exclusions it contains.
- App on, waiting for a request. A contingent liability layer applies. It is real coverage but materially smaller than the ride-engaged layer, and it typically sits above the personal policy rather than replacing it.
- Ride accepted, through drop-off. This is the one-million-dollar layer, and in this window the rideshare company’s policy is generally primary. Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage at a comparable limit is also usually available in this period, which matters more than people expect.
That third point deserves emphasis. If a passenger in an engaged rideshare is hit by a driver who has no insurance or minimal limits — not unusual in Los Angeles County — the uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage attached to the rideshare policy may be the most important coverage in the case, even though the rideshare driver did nothing wrong.
Why the app status is the first thing we go after
Because the entire coverage analysis turns on a fact only the rideshare company can prove, the trip record is the single most valuable piece of evidence in these cases. It shows whether the app was on, when the ride was accepted, the route, and often the speed and phone-motion data associated with the trip.
That record is held by a company with no obligation to hand it to an injured person on request, and in our experience an early written preservation demand is worth sending immediately. Passengers have an advantage here: the trip receipt in the app is itself contemporaneous proof of the ride and its timing. We tell passengers to screenshot the receipt, the driver’s name and vehicle, and the trip map before anything else — that data can become harder to retrieve later, and a screenshot taken the same day is not subject to anyone’s retention policy.
Passengers, other drivers, pedestrians and cyclists
A passenger in the rideshare vehicle is in the strongest position, because in a two-car collision one of the two drivers is almost always at fault and the passenger’s own conduct is rarely in issue. The practical question becomes which policy responds, not whether anyone is liable.
Someone hit by a rideshare driver is in a different position. They must establish the driver’s fault in the ordinary way, and then establish the app status to reach the larger layer. Pedestrians and cyclists struck near Hollywood, DTLA or the Westside pickup corridors face a further problem: rideshare drivers frequently stop in traffic lanes, bike lanes and red zones to collect passengers, and the resulting collisions often involve a dispute about whether the injured person was where they should have been. California applies a pure comparative fault approach, so a percentage of responsibility assigned to the injured person reduces recovery rather than eliminating it — but that reduction can be significant.
The classification argument, and why we do not lead with it
People often ask whether the rideshare company itself can be sued directly on the theory that the driver is its employee. It is a well-worn argument and it has produced a great deal of litigation. Our view is that for most injured people it is a distraction: the practical purpose of that argument is to reach a deeper pocket, and in the ride-engaged period a one-million-dollar layer is already available without it. We would rather spend the case establishing damages properly than litigating a threshold question that the available coverage usually makes unnecessary.
Medical treatment and what you take home
Rideshare cases raise the same practical problem as other injury claims: treatment is expensive, health coverage may be limited, and providers may agree to treat on a lien. Liens shape the net outcome as much as the headline settlement does, and we have written separately on medical liens and what you actually take home. Anyone weighing whether a claim is worth pursuing should read that alongside this.
We will not give figures here. Rideshare cases vary enormously with injury severity, treatment history, liability clarity and available limits, and any number presented as typical would be misleading.
What to do in the first week
Get medical attention and let the provider record how the injury happened, including that it was a rideshare trip. Screenshot the trip receipt. Get the police report number — LAPD or the relevant agency — and the other driver’s insurance details if you can. Report the incident through the app, but be careful about giving a recorded statement to any insurer before you understand which policy you are dealing with and what it covers. Adjusters ask reasonable-sounding questions early, and answers given before treatment is complete tend to be used later.
If you were hurt in a rideshare in Los Angeles and are not sure whose insurance applies, we are glad to look at it and tell you candidly what we think. Call (310) 556-9692. We handle injury matters on a fee taken from any recovery, with costs accounted for separately and the arrangement set out in a written fee agreement before we begin. No outcome is guaranteed, and past results do not predict future results.
Related reading: our personal injury overview and our motor vehicle accident page, plus injured on a Los Angeles sidewalk — who is actually responsible?
Again, these are our general views and opinions rather than legal advice or a definitive statement of California law. Reading this page does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and our firm, and every matter turns on its own facts.
TALK TO A LOS ANGELES ATTORNEY
Tell us what is happening and we will get back to you. Your consultation is free, and we will tell you honestly whether we think you have a case worth pursuing.
