What Happens When a Utah Car Crash Is Caused by a Driver Who Was Working at the Time?

A car accident may initially appear to involve two drivers and two insurance companies. Then one detail changes the picture: the person who caused the crash was on the job.

Maybe a salesperson was driving to meet a client. An employee was making a delivery. A technician was traveling between appointments. Or someone was running an errand for their employer when the collision occurred.

When a Utah driver causes an accident while performing job duties, the driver’s employer may also become relevant to the injury claim.

Determining whether that is the case requires a close look at what the employee was doing, why they were driving, and how the trip relates to their work.

Why the Driver’s Employment Status Matters After a Crash

Utah recognizes the doctrine of respondeat superior, which can make an employer responsible for an employee’s wrongful conduct when the employee was acting within the scope of employment.

That can significantly change the investigation after a serious collision.

Instead of examining only the individual driver’s actions and personal auto insurance, an attorney may need to determine whether the employer bears responsibility and whether additional insurance coverage applies.

However, the fact that someone happened to be “on the clock” does not automatically make the employer liable. Utah courts focus on whether the employee was performing assigned work or otherwise engaging in conduct sufficiently connected to the employer’s business.

Was the Employee Driving for Work or for Personal Reasons?

Consider two very different trips.

An employee leaves the office to deliver documents to a customer and crashes along the way. The trip is being made for the employer’s business.

Now imagine that same employee finishes work, gets into their own vehicle, and causes a collision while driving home.

Generally, Utah’s “coming and going” rule provides that an employee commuting to or from work in their own vehicle is not acting within the scope of employment. But real-world situations are not always that straightforward.

Questions may arise when an employee:

• Is traveling between job sites.
• Is meeting a customer or client.
• Is transporting equipment or materials.
• Is making a delivery.
• Is running a special errand requested by the employer.
• Combines a work assignment with a personal trip.
• Uses a personal vehicle regularly to perform job duties.

The trip’s purpose can therefore matter as much as the fact that the driver was employed at the time.

A Company Vehicle Does Not Necessarily Answer the Question

Seeing a business name on the vehicle involved in a crash can make employer responsibility seem obvious. Conversely, a collision involving an employee’s personal car may initially look completely unrelated to the employer.

Neither assumption necessarily tells the whole story.

A worker might use a personal vehicle while carrying out a company assignment. Another employee might have access to a company vehicle but be using it for an entirely personal purpose when a collision occurs.

Investigating the relationship between the trip and the job may require examining schedules, work assignments, company vehicle policies, communications, expense or mileage records, and other documentation.

What If the Employee Made a Personal Stop?

Work-related travel does not always follow a perfectly direct route.

An employee might stop for food, pick up a personal item, or briefly deviate from an assigned route before continuing a work task.

If a crash happens during that deviation, questions may arise about whether the employee was still acting within the scope of employment or had temporarily abandoned the employer’s business for a personal purpose.

These disputes can become highly fact-specific.

Utah courts have recognized that determining whether conduct falls within the scope of employment is often a factual question. That makes the employee’s purpose and the surrounding circumstances particularly important rather than relying on a simple label such as “working” or “off duty.”

Employer Involvement May Mean Different Insurance Questions

When a serious crash involves someone driving for work, identifying the potentially responsible parties is only one part of the investigation.

Insurance coverage must also be examined.

Depending on the circumstances, a claim could involve the driver’s personal auto coverage, a commercial vehicle policy, or other insurance connected with the employer or vehicle.

Which coverage applies and in what order can depend on the policies and facts of the collision.

This can become especially important after a catastrophic injury, when medical expenses, lost income, future care, and other damages may substantially exceed the coverage available under a single personal auto policy.

Look Beyond the Driver When a Crash Happens on the Job

If the person who caused your Utah car accident was working, making a delivery, traveling to an appointment, or otherwise conducting business, don’t treat that information as a minor detail.

It may affect who can be held responsible, what evidence must be preserved, and which insurance policies to investigate.

Waddoups Law represents people seriously injured in car accidents in Salt Lake City and throughout Utah.

Our personal injury attorneys investigate not only how a collision happened, but also whether a driver was acting for an employer and whether additional parties or insurance coverage may be involved.

If you were injured in a crash caused by someone who may have been working at the time, contact Waddoups Law for a free consultation to discuss the circumstances and your legal options.

About the Author

Riley Waddoups

Riley T. Waddoups, a personal injury attorney with 20 years of experience, represents clients across Utah in cases like wrongful death, truck accidents, and slip and falls. He is skilled in mediation, arbitration, and trial. Riley values family and has developed strong relationships with many clients over the years.