Was a driver entitled to dismissal of a financial-responsibility charge if the borrowed car was uninsured but the driver's own policy covered the trip?

Texas AG Opinion JM-439: Insurance on a Borrowed Car

Plain-English summary

Texas's safety-responsibility law required a vehicle owner or operator to furnish evidence of financial responsibility and made failure to maintain it a misdemeanor. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

The request concerned a driver stopped while using a borrowed car that the owner had not insured. The driver had an automobile liability policy in effect when the alleged violation occurred. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

JM-439 concluded that the charge should be dismissed if the driver's policy provided the coverage required by law while the driver operated that vehicle. The policy did not need specific language referring to an uninsured vehicle owned by someone else, so long as its legal effect supplied adequate coverage. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1986. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the borrowed car itself have to be insured by its owner?

Not for the defense described in JM-439. The operator could obtain dismissal if the operator's own valid policy provided the statutorily required protection while the borrowed car was being driven. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Did the driver's policy have to say expressly that it covered uninsured borrowed vehicles?

No. JM-439 said no particular wording was necessary if the policy's legal effect provided adequate coverage for the operator at the time of the alleged violation. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Whose policy had to be produced in court?

The person charged had to produce an automobile liability policy or certificate of self-insurance previously issued to that person and valid when the alleged offense occurred. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Background and statutory framework

Section 1B described evidence of financial responsibility, including a liability policy meeting the act's minimum limits or a photocopy of that policy. Section 1D made a valid policy or certificate of self-insurance a defense and directed dismissal of the charge. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

The opinion read those provisions in light of the law's purpose, identified in Attorney General Opinion MW-547, of ensuring motorists' financial responsibility for harm caused through vehicle operation. Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Citations and references

• article 6701h, V.T.C.S., sections 1A through 1D
• Attorney General Opinion MW-547 (1982)
• Attorney General Opinion JM-315 (1985)
• Attorney General Opinion MW-577 (1982)

Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/jim-mattox/jm-0439
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1986/jm0439.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF via OCR. Minor errors may remain; the linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General

February 21, 1986

Honorable Stephen C. Howard
Orange County Attorney
Courthouse
Orange, Texas 77630

Opinion No. JM-439

Re: Compliance with section 1A of article 6701h, V.T.C.S., and the dismissal of charges

Dear Mr. Howard:

You have asked about the application of section 1A of article 6701h, V.T.C.S., the safety responsibility law, which provides that no motor vehicle may be operated in this state

unless a policy of automobile liability insurance in at least the minimum amounts to provide evidence of financial responsibility under this Act is in effect to insure against potential losses which may arise out of the operation of that vehicle.

V.T.C.S. art. 6701h, § 1A(b).

The statute further provides:

Sec. 1B. (a) On and after January 1, 1982, every owner and/or operator in the State of Texas shall be required, as a condition of driving, to furnish, upon request, evidence of financial responsibility to a law enforcement officer of the State of Texas or any subdivision thereof, or agent of the Department, or to another person involved in an accident.

(b) The following evidence of financial responsibility satisfies the requirement of Subsection (a) of this section:

(1) a liability insurance policy in at least the minimum limits required by this Act or a photocopy of that policy;

. . . .

Sec. 1C. Failure to maintain financial responsibility as defined in section 1(10) of this Act is a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not less than Seventy-five Dollars ($75). Subsequent offenses shall be Class B misdemeanors, punishable by a fine of not less than Two Hundred Dollars ($200).

Sec. 1D. It is a defense to prosecution under this Act if the person charged produces in court an automobile liability insurance policy or a certificate of self-insurance previously issued to that person that was valid at the time that the offense is alleged to have occurred and the charge shall be dismissed.

V.T.C.S. art. 6701h, §§ 1B, 1C, 1D.

You suggest a fact situation where a motorist arrested for a violation of article 6701h, section 1A, while driving a borrowed car that was not insured by the owner, produced a policy of liability insurance that was in effect at the time of the alleged violation covering himself. You ask whether the motorist in such a situation would be entitled to dismissal of the charges under section 1D of the statute, and whether, in order to use the defense, the policy produced must "contain language that he is covered when driving an uninsured vehicle."

In Attorney General Opinion MW-547 (1982), the "manifest object" and purpose of the provision was said to be "to assure the financial responsibility of motorists for the protection of those whose lives or property might be harmed by the operation of vehicles." Section 1B requires that every "owner and/or operator" furnish evidence of financial responsibility, and under section 1D it is a defense to prosecution if the "person charged produces" an automobile liability insurance policy which meets the requirements of the act.

If the operator, whether or not he owns the vehicle, produces a valid policy that adequately protected the public at the time he operated the vehicle, he is entitled to dismissal of the charge against him under section 1D of article 6701h, V.T.C.S. The policy need not necessarily contain specific language expressly referring to vehicles "not insured by the owner thereof," so long as language in the policy has the legal result of providing statutorily adequate coverage for the operator while operating the vehicle at the time of the alleged violation. Cf. Attorney General Opinion JM-315 (1985); MW-577 (1982).

SUMMARY

If the operator charged with failure to maintain financial responsibility produces an automobile liability insurance policy which met the requirements of the safety responsibility law at the time he operated the vehicle, he is entitled to dismissal of the charge against him though the vehicle (if owned by another) was not insured by the owner. No specific policy language is required so long as it is legally adequate to satisfy the statute.

Very truly yours,

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

JACK HIGHTOWER
First Assistant Attorney General

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

ROBERT GRAY
Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Bruce Youngblood
Assistant Attorney General