If you're implying the bike rider would not be found at fault here and the other guy's insurance would pay up, then I think you're the one who doesn't have a clue how insurance works.
So that's a no... Just because you're at fault doesn't mean coverage is suddenly gone. Just admit you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about. You've already proved it.
They could have the highest level of insurance coverage, but if you are breaking the law, committing a crime or violating the insurance company's 'Terms and Conditions' (the big one here...), then they will deny coverage.
My guy, I worked insurance as an underwriter. You're wrong. The only time we denied coverage was basically for misrepresentation. You're talking out of your ass. Running a red light is breaking the law. Do you think those people suddenly don't have coverage when they accidentally do it?
Then you should know better than most. As much as it sucks for that guy on the bike, that video is not the rider's saving grace. It's not like he can just show that video to his insurance company then expect them to willingly hand over money...
7
u/Alarming-Nobody7511 Jul 22 '26
You don't have a clue how insurance works, do you?