Why does my personal auto policy deny coverage when I drive for Uber?
A standard personal auto policy is priced and written for personal use, and most contain a livery or commercial-use exclusion that removes coverage while the car is being used to carry passengers for money. When a driver is logged into the Uber app and working, that exclusion can apply, leaving the personal insurer free to deny a claim for a crash that happened on the clock.
The livery exclusion explained ¶
Insurers calculate premiums based on expected risk. Driving strangers for hire involves more miles, more time on the road, and different exposure than commuting or errands, so personal policies routinely exclude coverage when the vehicle is used as a “livery” or for “carrying persons for a fee.” This language is not aimed at punishing rideshare drivers specifically; it predates app-based services and sweeps them in because the activity fits the exclusion. The result is that an insurer can lawfully refuse to pay for damage or injuries that occur while the driver is engaged in rideshare work.
The exclusion typically turns on what the driver was doing, not on whether the policy mentions Uber by name. Once the app is active and the driver is available for or carrying a fare, the personal insurer may treat the loss as a commercial use outside the contract.
How Georgia fills the gap ¶
Georgia anticipated this conflict. Under O.C.G.A. § 33-1-24, the transportation network company must maintain coverage during rideshare activity, including up to $1,000,000 during a prearranged ride. The statute lets the required coverage come from the driver’s policy, the company’s policy, or a combination, which means the rideshare company’s insurance is designed to step in precisely when the personal policy steps out.
Drivers who want overlap can also buy a rideshare endorsement, an add-on that extends personal coverage into the periods a standard policy would otherwise exclude.
The bottom line ¶
A personal auto policy denies a rideshare claim because its livery exclusion strips coverage during commercial use, and that is by design rather than oversight. Georgia’s § 33-1-24 framework is built to cover the same periods through the company’s policy, so the denial usually shifts a claim toward the rideshare insurer rather than leaving an injured person without any coverage at all.
This article is for general educational and informational purposes only and is not legal advice. It does not create an attorney-client relationship, and Georgia law may change. For advice about a specific situation, consult a licensed Georgia personal injury attorney.