Trucking companies, known as motor carriers are required by Texas law to file proof of commercial automobile liability insurance for each registered vehicle. The minimum amount of coverage depends on the type of vehicle and cargo. This is outlined in 43 Texas Administration Code (TAC) §218.16(a). The insurance requirements for truck drivers and trucking companies ensure they are covered in the event of a serious accident or injury. Unfortunately, truck accidents are more common than you’d expect and the financial impact can be tremendous for victims. It’s important to know your rights after a truck accident and the ways insurance companies try to avoid liability.

Before pursuing an insurance claim after a truck accident, we recommend you reach out to The Krist Law Firm, P.C. at (281) 326-9197. We offer free consultations with a skilled Houston truck accident lawyer.

We’ll explain your rights, what to expect, and how to recover the maximum compensation possible.

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMERCIAL TRUCKS

Truck drivers in every state must adhere to the minimum liability insurance requirements established by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).

Commercial liability insurance covers the costs of financial damages sustained by the victim of a truck accident. It might cover medical bills, repair costs, and even funds for suffering and future expenses. It protects drivers and trucking companies when they cause a serious accident.

The minimum insurance for truck drivers depends on the weight of the vehicle and the type of load being hauled. For example, trucks that weigh over 10,001 pounds that carry non-hazardous materials must have $750,000 of liability insurance. Trucks of the same weight that carry hazardous or explosive materials, on the other hand, must obtain $5,000,000 in liability coverage.

LARGE PASSENGER VEHICLES

There are also special requirements for large passenger vehicles, like buses. For interstate passenger carriers that can fit 16 or more people, $5,000,000 of liability coverage must be obtained.

When the same vehicle carries 15 or fewer passengers, the requirement is $1,500,000. The only exceptions are for small vehicles that carry less than seven people, like taxis and small buses. Those who operate these vehicles are exempt from the limits listed above.

For commercial vehicles that only travel in Texas, policy limits may be lower. Trucks that carry only household goods only need $300,000 in commercial vehicle liability coverage. Trucks that carry general freight only within Texas need $500,000 in coverage. Other trucks must maintain FMCSA requirements.

OTHER TYPES OF TRUCKING INSURANCE

For trucks carrying household goods, the company must have a minimum of $5,000 for loss or damage to a single shipper’s cargo and a minimum of $10,000 for loss or damage to multiple shippers’ cargo.

Motor carriers must also provide workers’ comp coverage for its employees or accidental insurance coverage of at least:

• $300,000 for medical expenses for at least 104 weeks
• $100,000 for accidental death or dismemberment – including 70% of the employee’s pre-injury income for at least 104 weeks
• $500 for a maximum weekly benefit

INDEPENDENT TRUCK DRIVER INSURANCE

When truckers are employed by a motor carrier, they may be covered by the liability and cargo policies of their business. Truckers are then required to carry their own non-trucking liability insurance to cover injuries and damages they may cause while not on duty.

However, some truck drivers are independent contractors or own their own companies. In these cases, they must carry their own primary liability policies.

COMPENSATION AFTER HOUSTON TRUCK ACCIDENTS

In Texas, truck carriers take on many of the risks that come with owning and operating a trucking business. As a result, if you or a loved one become injured in a trucking accident caused by a driver or the company’s negligence, the best way to recover the compensation for your losses is to file an insurance claim against the trucking company and the appropriate insurance company.

When you are involved in a truck accident, you can often obtain compensation because of the insurance truckers must carry. A car accident is a different story.

In Texas, the insurance requirements for passenger cars is $30,000 per injured person, $60,000 per accident, and $25,000 for property damage. In a typical car accident, the other driver’s insurance will likely be insufficient for covering many costs.

CALL A HOUSTON TRUCK ACCIDENT LAWYER TO GET WHAT YOU DESERVE

After any serious truck accident, talk with an attorney as soon as possible. Through a thorough investigation, your lawyer will determine who was at fault, who is liable for your injuries, and identify all relevant insurance policies. Then, your attorney will pursue the maximum compensation possible.

Whether your truck accident led to a minor injury or a life-changing condition, you deserve to be compensated. By filing a personal injury lawsuit, you can recover a variety of damages, like medical costs, disfigurement, and lost wages.

The Houston truck accident attorneys at The Krist Law Firm, P.C. have spent years helping people gain the compensation they need to move on with their lives. We know the insurance issues you’ll encounter and how to overcome challenges.

Call (281) 326-9197 for a free, no-risk legal consultation.

In a split decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently determined that the Bank of New York Mellon (the “Bank”), as first deed of trust lienholder, could challenge a homeowner's association's (“HOA”) sale of a property as a violation of an automatic bankruptcy stay, giving the Bank superior title.  See  Bank of New York Mellon as Tr. for Certificateholders of CWALT, Inc., Alternative Loan Tr. 2005-54CB, Mortg. Pass-Through Certificates Series 2005 -54CB v. Enchantment at Sunset Bay Condo. Ass'n , 2 F.4th 1229 (9th Cir. 2021). In the case, Harold Hill (“Hill”) purchased property at 732 Hardy Way, Mesquite, Nevada. The Bank was a first deed of trust lienholder. In January 2014, Hill fell behind in his HOA dues, and the HOA recorded a notice of delinquent assessment lien in February 2014. In April 2014, Hill filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy, and an automatic stay went into effect. On July 15, 2014, while Hill's bankruptcy case was pending, the HOA recorded a notice of foreclosure sale, and sold the property to the 732 Hardy Way Trust (the “Trust”). The Bank sued to quiet title and for declaratory relief on the basis that the foreclosure sale was void because it violated the bankruptcy stay, among other relief.

The Bank and the Trust each moved for summary judgment. The Trust argued it had superior title because the HOA foreclosure sale extinguished the Bank's deed of trust. The Bank argued that the HOA foreclosure sale did not extinguish its lien because the sale violated the automatic bankruptcy stay and thus was void under Nevada and Ninth Circuit precedent, or alternatively, Nevada's HOA foreclosure statute violated due process. The District Court granted summary judgment in favor of the Trust and dismissed the remaining claims against the HOA, holding that “the foreclosure sale extinguished the [Bank’s] deed of trust on the [P]roperty and that [the Trust] purchased the property free and clear of the deed of trust.” The Bank appealed.

The Ninth Circuit reversed. First, it held that the Bank, as a creditor, had standing to make the argument that the HOA foreclosure sale occurred in violation of the automatic stay and was void. Second, the Court found that, under Nevada precedent, an HOA foreclosure sale “conducted during an automatic stay in bankruptcy proceedings is invalid.” The Court then concluded that the Bank's was interest superior to the Trust's interest because Hill listed the property in his bankruptcy schedules in March 2014 and the property was auctioned off on September 19, 2014, while the stay was in effect. Thus, the sale was void, and not merely voidable, under Nevada law. 

In dissent, Judge Forrest argued that the Bank did not have standing to challenge the sale under the Bankruptcy Code, because “[t]he Bank wants the foreclosure sale declared void to preserve its lien interest in the subject property . does not advance or preserve the bankruptcy estate[.]” Thus, because the Bank was only pursuing its own interest, rather than that of the estate, she argued it should not have standing to seek to void the sale. -title claim is unrelated to its role as a 'creditor' and the purposes for which the automatic stay was enacted, I would reject the Bank's 'disingenuous attempt to use the Bankruptcy Code [for its own] advantage.'”

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.