Attorney Michael Rehm — (800) 978-0754

A crash involving an Uber or Lyft vehicle raises insurance coverage questions that do not arise in a standard two-car accident. The coverage that applies depends on which period the driver was in at the moment of impact, and on whether the TNC driver or a third party caused the crash. Effective January 1, 2026, Senate Bill 371 restructured the insurance requirements for transportation network companies under Public Utilities Code § 5433. The $1,000,000 primary liability coverage for crashes caused by a TNC driver remains unchanged. The UM/UIM safety net for passengers struck by uninsured third parties has been significantly reduced.

Attorney Michael Rehm handles Uber and Lyft accident cases throughout San Francisco and the Bay Area, representing passengers, pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers of other vehicles who are injured in crashes involving TNC drivers.

The TNC Insurance Framework Under SB 371

California regulates transportation network companies under Public Utilities Code § 5433, as amended by Senate Bill 371 (effective January 1, 2026). The insurance obligations depend on which period the driver was in at the time of the crash:

Period 0 — App off: The TNC insurance framework does not apply. Only the driver's personal auto policy is at issue.

Period 1 — App on, no ride accepted (and between rides): The driver is logged on but has not yet accepted a ride. Under § 5433(c), the TNC must maintain primary coverage of at least $50,000 per person / $100,000 per incident / $30,000 property damage. SB 371 added a new requirement: the TNC must also maintain excess coverage of at least $200,000 per occurrence to cover liability that exceeds the primary limits during this period. This same framework applies between rides — after one ride completes and before the driver accepts the next request.

Period 2 — Ride accepted, en route to passenger: The driver has accepted a ride and is driving to the pickup location. Under § 5433(b), the TNC must maintain primary liability coverage of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence. No separate UM/UIM requirement applies during Period 2.

Period 3 — Passenger in vehicle: The passenger is in the vehicle. The $1,000,000 primary liability coverage continues. SB 371 amended § 5433(b)(2) to require the TNC to maintain UM/UIM coverage of $60,000 per person / $300,000 per incident during Period 3 — reduced from the prior $1,000,000 requirement. This UM/UIM coverage is now solely the TNC's obligation and applies when a third party such as an uninsured or hit-and-run driver causes the crash while the passenger is in the vehicle.

Determining which period applied requires obtaining the driver's trip log data from the TNC platform. Uber and Lyft maintain timestamped records that can establish precisely when a trip was accepted, when the driver arrived, and when the passenger was picked up and dropped off. That data is obtainable through litigation discovery and must be preserved through a litigation hold notice directed to the TNC as early as possible.

Liability vs. UM/UIM — A Critical Distinction After SB 371

The $1,000,000 primary coverage in Periods 2 and 3 applies to liability claims — claims arising from the TNC driver's own negligence. When the TNC driver causes the crash, the $1,000,000 policy compensates injured passengers, pedestrians, and other drivers. That coverage is unchanged by SB 371.

The UM/UIM coverage applies only during Period 3 and only when a third party causes the crash. SB 371 reduced that coverage from $1,000,000 per person to $60,000 per person. A passenger struck by an uninsured or hit-and-run third party while riding in a TNC vehicle can access $60,000 in TNC UM/UIM coverage. In catastrophic injury cases, the passenger's own UM/UIM coverage under a personal auto policy becomes the next relevant layer of protection. Insurance Code § 11580.2.

Passenger Claims

A passenger injured in an Uber or Lyft vehicle should first establish who caused the crash. If the TNC driver caused the crash, the $1,000,000 primary liability policy applies — unchanged by SB 371. If a third party caused the crash during Period 3, the TNC's UM/UIM coverage of $60,000 per person is available, and the passenger's own UM/UIM policy may provide additional coverage beyond that amount. TNCs argue their drivers are independent contractors. The TNC's insurance obligations under Public Utilities Code § 5433 exist regardless of that classification because those obligations are statutory.

Third-Party Claims

A pedestrian, cyclist, or driver of another vehicle struck by a TNC driver has a negligence claim against the TNC driver. In Periods 2 and 3, the $1,000,000 TNC liability policy is primary when the TNC driver caused the crash. In Period 1 and between rides, the $50,000/$100,000 primary coverage plus the new $200,000 excess policy per occurrence applies. Civil Code § 1714. Pure comparative fault: Li v. Yellow Cab Co. (1975) 13 Cal.3d 804. Statute of limitations: two years from the date of the accident. Code of Civil Procedure § 335.1.

San Francisco Government Entity Claims

San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA/Muni) operates bus, streetcar, cable car, and BART-SFO services. As a common carrier, SFMTA owes passengers the highest degree of care under Civil Code § 2100. TNC crashes involving SFMTA vehicles require a government tort claim within six months of injury under Government Code § 911.2.

Attorney Michael Rehm handles Uber and Lyft accident cases throughout San Francisco on a contingency fee basis. No fee without a recovery. Call (800) 978-0754 to arrange a free consultation.

The information on this page is general legal information, not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case turns on its own facts. The law can change — statutes are amended, cases are decided, and regulations are revised; nothing on this page should be relied upon as a statement of current law without verification. Deadlines and legal bars discussed on this page are general guides — whether a particular deadline applies, has run, or is subject to tolling, and whether a particular doctrine bars or limits recovery in your case, requires individual analysis. Contact Attorney Michael Rehm to discuss the specific facts of your situation.