Were you hurt in a Colorado Uber or Lyft? The $1 million and the $200,000 / $400,000 are not the same coverage

Both dollar floors run from acceptance until the rider departs

The $1 million figure is per occurrence. The statute does not write it as a split limit, and it does not write it as a combined single limit. Both company certificates described below use a combined single limit for the post-acceptance liability they show. The 50/100/30 waiting figure is not the logged-off floor. Logged-off compulsory coverage remains 25/50/15. The Division of Insurance states that same 25/50/15 floor.

Getting into the car does not start a second uninsured-motorist clock. Acceptance starts both the $1 million liability period and the 200/400 uninsured-motorist period. Departure ends both. The statute does not keep the prearranged ride open until an app transaction is finished.

A driver shall not provide services unless matched through the digital network and shall not accept a street hail. Section 40-10.1-605(1)(a). An unmatched hail is not, by itself, a prearranged ride. Do not assume the $1 million tier applies without an acceptance.

Section 40-10.1-603 says transportation network companies are governed exclusively by this part 6, except as otherwise provided in article 6 of title 25.5. The dollar floors above are the part 6 floors.

Logged in, with no accepted ride, subsection (3) stops at 50/100/30

The lead-in of section 40-10.1-604(3) is the period when a driver is logged into a transportation network company’s digital network but is not engaged in a prearranged ride. For that period the statute requires a primary automobile insurance policy that recognizes the driver is a transportation network company driver. The limits are at least $50,000 to any one person in any one accident, $100,000 to all persons in any one accident, and $30,000 for property damage in any one accident, exclusive of interest and costs. Section 40-10.1-604(3)(b)(II).

That $30,000 property-damage figure is the rideshare waiting-period floor. It is not the $15,000 property-damage figure in the ordinary compulsory statute.

Subsection (3) does not set an uninsured-motorist dollar. It does not say the company drops down from the first dollar if the driver’s policy lapses. No sentence in section 40-10.1-604 says that a lapse, or a missing driver policy, makes the company provide the statutory coverage from the first dollar.

The logged-in policy can be any of three forms: full-time coverage similar to the coverage required by commission rules under section 40-10.1-107(1); a rider or endorsement on the driver’s personal policy; or a corporate liability insurance policy purchased by the company that provides primary coverage for the logged-in period. Section 40-10.1-604(3)(b)(III). If the company buys that corporate policy, it files proof with the commission. If the duty is placed on the driver, the company shall verify that the driver bought it. Section 40-10.1-604(3)(d). Verification is not a promise that the company’s policy pays from the first dollar when the driver’s policy has lapsed.

One drafting point is not a reason to treat the waiting period as uninsured. Subsection (3)(b)(I) says the logged-in policy must cover the driver’s provision of transportation network company services while logged in, and section 40-10.1-602(6)(a) defines those services as transportation of a rider with whom the driver is matched. The lead-in of subsection (3) still attaches 50/100/30 to the time the driver is logged in and not in a prearranged ride. The certificates below are written to that lead-in. Colorado does not wait for a match to require insurance.

Commission rule 4 CCR 723-6-6706, in the Cornell reproduction as of October 3, 2026, does not set a different dollar limit. It requires every transportation network company to keep liability coverage that conforms to section 40-10.1-604(2) and to file Form T. If the company maintains the primary coverage in subsection (3), it files Form P. If it does not, it files a certification that each driver authorized to log in complies with subsection (3). 4 CCR 723-6-6706. The dollars above come from the statute.

The 200/400 UM floor is not the $1 million liability figure

During a prearranged ride, coverage must be at least one million dollars per occurrence, at all times the driver is engaged in that ride. The company or the driver may secure that liability policy. Section 40-10.1-604(2). The subsection says it becomes effective ninety days after June 5, 2014. That older liability figure is not evidence that 200/400 uninsured-motorist coverage existed in 2014.

On and after August 10, 2022

On and after August 10, 2022, the company must secure uninsured-motorist coverage, as described in section 10-4-609, of at least $200,000 per person and $400,000 per occurrence. The coverage is for the driver and for each rider in the driver’s personal vehicle, at all times the driver is engaged in a prearranged ride. Section 40-10.1-604(2.5). The statute does not offer the driver as an alternative purchaser of that uninsured-motorist coverage. For an accident before August 10, 2022, do not apply the 200/400 figure without reading the statute then in force.

Section 10-4-609(1)(a)(II) says the named insured may not reject that coverage for periods when the driver is engaged in a prearranged ride. The prohibition starts at acceptance. It is not limited to the minutes a rider is in the car, and it does not apply to the logged-in waiting period.

The required policy may be placed with an insurer licensed under title 10 or with a surplus lines insurer authorized under article 5 of title 10, and it need not separately satisfy part 6 of article 4 of title 10. Section 40-10.1-604(4). Section 10-4-609 sits in that part. The part 6 carve-out is not a license to reject the prearranged-ride uninsured-motorist coverage. Subsection (2.5) states the 200/400 requirement, and section 10-4-609(1)(a)(II) forbids the rejection. Section 40-10.1-604(8) says nothing in the section modifies or abrogates otherwise applicable insurance requirements in title 10. Read those sentences together.

“As described in section 10-4-609” brings in the kind of coverage that statute describes, including underinsured-motorist bodily injury and the difference language in subsection (1)(c), at a floor of 200/400. It does not say the company must buy uninsured-motorist coverage equal to the $1 million liability limit. How that coverage pays is set out below. It is not a property-damage benefit.

Valid and collectible policies share the claim by the statute’s equal division

If more than one policy provides valid and collectible coverage for a loss arising out of an occurrence involving a motor vehicle operated by a driver, the responsibility for the claim must be divided on a pro rata basis among all of the applicable policies. The next sentence calls that an equal division. It may be modified only by the written agreement of all of the insurers of the applicable policies and the owners of those policies. Section 40-10.1-604(6).

The statute says both “pro rata” and “equal division.” It does not give a limits-ratio formula. It does not say the personal policy is excess. It does not say the company drops down from the first dollar if the driver’s policy lapses. The division rule applies only when more than one policy is valid and collectible. It does not create a second policy.

The prearranged-ride liability the company or the driver must secure is called primary liability insurance. Section 40-10.1-604(2). The logged-in policy is called a primary automobile insurance policy. Section 40-10.1-604(3)(b). Those words sit beside subsection (6). They do not replace it when two policies both provide valid and collectible coverage.

A personal policy that excludes the logged-in use is not valid and collectible for that loss. The division rule does not create coverage the personal policy excluded. A certificate that describes an insured auto is evidence of what that certificate describes. It is not the policy, and an ACORD disclaimer does not settle which of the statutory purchase structures the company used.

Uber’s certificate prints no UM while available, and 200/400 UM after acceptance

Uber’s Colorado file, the certificate linked from Colorado on Uber’s certificates list and read October 3, 2026, is issued by United Financial Casualty Company, NAIC 11770. The certificate date is March 1, 2026. The policies run March 1, 2026 through March 1, 2027. The certificate face does not print the words “State of Colorado.” The state identification is Uber’s index. The $30,000 property-damage limit and the 200/400 uninsured-motorist limit track section 40-10.1-604. Uber Colorado certificate of liability insurance.

While the driver is logged on, available to receive requests, and has not accepted a request, policy 06250141 prints $50,000 bodily injury per person, $100,000 bodily injury per accident, and $30,000 property damage. The description states that uninsured-motorist and underinsured-motorist coverage “is not included in any amount.” Whether the sentence is a valid written rejection under section 10-4-623, for a policy that section 40-10.1-604(4)(b) says need not separately satisfy part 6, is not settled.

After acceptance, policy 06250146 prints a $1,000,000 combined single limit. The insured auto is one the driver operates after recorded acceptance, en route to the pickup or from the pickup to the final destination. Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage “is included in the amount of $200,000 for death and bodily injury per person and $400,000 for death and bodily injury per accident.” The certificate does not split that uninsured-motorist amount between the drive to the pickup and the trip with the rider.

Comprehensive and collision on the accepted-trip policy

Additional remarks for policy 06250146, effective March 1, 2026, list comprehensive at actual cash value with a $2,500 deductible and collision at actual cash value with a $2,500 deductible. The certificate does not make that physical damage contingent on the driver’s own collision coverage. It does not list a personal-injury-protection limit, a medical-payments limit, or a waiting-period uninsured-motorist dollar.

Uber’s general insurance page is a different document. It says that while online and available the liability insurance is at least $50,000 / $100,000 bodily injury and $25,000 property damage, and that repair coverage while en route or on a trip is contingent on the driver maintaining comprehensive and collision. Uber’s general insurance page. Those sentences are not the Colorado certificate. The Colorado certificate prints $30,000 of property damage, and its physical-damage remarks do not contain the contingency sentence. Do not merge the two documents. The same general page says Uber maintains uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage for rideshare where it is required. The Colorado certificate states the Colorado amount, and it states that amount only after acceptance.

Lyft prints 200/400 UM on Period 2 and Period 3, and prints no Period 3 liability dollar

Lyft’s current Colorado certificate, read October 3, 2026, is issued by Mobilitas General Insurance Company, NAIC 10675. That is not Mobilitas Insurance Company. The certificate date is August 13, 2026. The policies run October 1, 2026 through October 1, 2027. The form says it is evidence of insurance only for Colorado. Certificate number SEA-004219058-07. Lyft Colorado certificate of liability insurance.

Period 1, policy COBA1T6624548271, prints bodily injury of $50,000 per person / $100,000 per accident and property damage of $30,000. Period 2, policy COBA2T6624548271, prints a $1,000,000 combined single limit. Period 3, policy COBA3T6624548271, prints “APD Deductible: $2,500” and does not print a liability dollar. The current form states no Period 3 liability limit.

The remarks state that policies for Period 2 and Period 3 include uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage of $200,000 each person and $400,000 each accident. They do not state that amount on Period 1. Silence on Period 1 does not show a written rejection. The certificate does not define Period 1, Period 2, or Period 3, so the labels don’t say which app status each one covers.

Period 2 and Period 3 use the word “Primary” in the coverage-type line. The form does not say Period 1 is primary, and it does not say Period 1 is excess. Auto physical damage is provided under the Period 2 and Period 3 policies at actual cash value or the cost of repair, whichever is less, less the $2,500 deductible. The physical-damage sentence does not make that coverage contingent on the driver’s own collision coverage. The certificate does not list personal injury protection, medical payments, or a Period 1 uninsured-motorist dollar.

The personal policy is not required to cover logged-in time

Nothing in section 40-10.1-604 requires a personal automobile insurance policy to provide coverage for the period a driver is logged into a transportation network company’s digital network. Section 40-10.1-604(5). A personal policy that complies with part 6 of article 4 of title 10 is sufficient to satisfy the compulsory insurance requirements of that part. Section 40-10.1-604(4). Satisfying 25/50/15 for ordinary use does not, by itself, satisfy the logged-in 50/100/30 requirement or the $1 million prearranged-ride requirement.

The disclosure the company must put in the prospective driver’s terms of service is this sentence and no more: “While operating on the transportation network company's digital network, your personal automobile insurance policy might not afford liability coverage, depending on the policy's terms.” Section 40-10.1-605(1)(i). A separate lienholder disclosure is required, and the prospective driver must acknowledge the terms electronically or by signature. Section 40-10.1-605(1)(j). The disclosure statute does not say the personal policy excludes uninsured-motorist coverage, medical payments, comprehensive, or collision. It says the personal policy might not afford liability coverage, depending on its terms.

The sections read for personal-policy rules do not contain a list of coverages a personal insurer may strip while the driver is logged in. They also do not say the personal policy must cover those minutes. Some primary policy, which may be the company’s, has to cover the logged-in period at 50/100/30. The certificate is evidence of what the company bought. It is not a ruling that every personal insurer uses the same exclusion.

Logged-off driving is the ordinary compulsory policy: $25,000 / $50,000 bodily injury and $15,000 property damage. Sections 10-4-620 and 42-7-103(2). The 42-7-103 text comes from the public.law reproduction of the 2024 title 42 print. The Division of Insurance states the same figures. Those figures were not raised by a bill found in the 2025 Digest of Bills or the 2026 Digest of Bills. House Bill 25-1179, approved April 17, 2025 and effective January 1, 2026, requires applicable auto coverage to include the replacement cost of a child restraint system that was in the vehicle. House Bill 25-1179. That is not a liability-limit increase and not a change to the rideshare tiers.

Section 10-4-621 says insurers shall offer collision coverage subject to deductibles of $100 and $250. That offer is not the $2,500 deductible on a company certificate. If the company’s insurer pays a comprehensive or collision claim, section 40-10.1-604(9) requires the payment to go directly to the business repairing the vehicle, or jointly to the owner and the primary lienholder. The commission shall not assess a fine for a violation of that subsection. That is a payment direction. It does not make comprehensive or collision mandatory, and it is not the deductible.

Uninsured-motorist coverage includes underinsured drivers, with no liability setoff

Colorado uses one uninsured-motorist statute, and that statute includes underinsured-motorist bodily-injury coverage. Section 10-4-609, read from the 2024 title 10 print. If the named insured does not reject it, an automobile liability policy delivered or issued for delivery in Colorado, for a motor vehicle licensed for highway use in Colorado, must provide uninsured-motorist coverage for bodily injury or death at the limits in section 42-7-103(2). Those incorporated bodily-injury limits are $25,000 / $50,000. They are not the policy’s full liability limits, and they are not 200/400.

Before the policy is issued or renewed, the insurer shall offer the named insured the right to obtain uninsured-motorist coverage equal to the insured’s bodily-injury liability limits, and it need not offer more than those limits. Section 10-4-609(2). After the insured selects limits or rejects the coverage, the insurer need not keep notifying the policyholder on renewal, but the insured may make a written request for more coverage. Section 10-4-609(3).

A written rejection of the subsection (1) coverage continues until the insured requests that the insurer provide the coverage. The insurer has no duty to offer it again after that written rejection merely because vehicles change or the policy is renewed, replaced, or reinstated. Section 10-4-623(3)(b). If the insured selected a limit rather than rejecting the coverage, and bodily-injury liability limits later increase so that the uninsured-motorist limit would be lower, the insurer must offer new uninsured-motorist coverage under section 10-4-609(2). Section 10-4-623(3)(c)(II). A written rejection is required for the minimum coverage in subsection (1). The statute does not say a written rejection is required for every decision to buy less than the full liability limit. Those are not the same choice.

The rideshare exception is narrower than a total ban on rejection. The named insured that is a transportation network company securing the section 40-10.1-604(2.5) coverage may not reject it for a prearranged ride. Section 10-4-609(1)(a)(II). That sentence does not set a 200/400 dollar for the logged-in waiting period.

Uninsured-motorist coverage includes bodily injury or death that an insured is legally entitled to collect from the owner or driver of an underinsured motor vehicle. An underinsured motor vehicle is a land motor vehicle, the ownership, maintenance, or use of which is insured or bonded for bodily injury or death at the time of the accident. Section 10-4-609(4). The current definition does not say “whose liability limits are less than the insured’s uninsured-motorist limits.” Subsection (5), which older cases used for a setoff formula, is deleted effective January 1, 2008.

The payment sentence now in force is section 10-4-609(1)(c). The coverage is in addition to any legal liability coverage and covers the difference, if any, between the limits of any legal liability coverage and the damages sustained, excluding exemplary damages, up to the maximum amount of the uninsured-motorist coverage. A single policy or endorsement issued for a single premium and covering multiple vehicles may be limited to applying once per accident. The amount available shall not be reduced by a setoff from any other coverage, including legal liability insurance, medical payments coverage, health insurance, or other uninsured or underinsured motor vehicle insurance. Do not describe Colorado uninsured-motorist coverage as reduced, dollar for dollar, by the tortfeasor’s liability payment.

Property-damage uninsured-motorist coverage is a separate request

The 200/400 rideshare figure is bodily injury. Neither current certificate states uninsured-motorist property damage. Property-damage uninsured-motorist coverage is provided at the request of the insured, on a policy that already provides bodily-injury uninsured-motorist coverage and does not also provide collision. It pays actual cash value or the cost of repair or replacement, whichever is less. It does not cover damage without actual physical contact, damage paid or payable under other property insurance, or loss of use. Section 10-4-610. The Division of Insurance describes the same optional coverage. It is not part of the 200/400 rideshare floor.

No personal injury protection, and $5,000 medical payments is not a rideshare floor

Colorado is not a no-fault state. The compulsory coverage in the current statute is legal liability coverage at 25/50/15. Sections 10-4-619 and 10-4-620. No section read for the auto-policy rules requires personal injury protection, a tort threshold, or wage-loss benefits as a condition of a Colorado auto policy. The Division of Insurance lists liability under its required-coverage heading. Neither current certificate lists personal injury protection. Neither current certificate lists Colorado personal injury protection for Uber or Lyft.

Medical-payments coverage is different, and it is still not a rideshare certificate limit. No automobile liability policy shall be delivered or issued for delivery in Colorado unless it provides medical-payments benefits of $5,000, except as the section provides. Section 10-4-635(1)(a). The named insured may reject that coverage in writing, or in the same medium in which the application was taken. The insurer must keep proof of the rejection for at least three years, and that proof is presumed valid for all insureds under the policy, including resident relatives and permissive users. Section 10-4-635(1)(b). After a selection or a rejection, the insurer need not send a new notice on renewal. Section 10-4-635(1)(d).

A missing MedPay rejection is not harmless on a policy the section covers

If the insurer fails to offer medical-payments coverage, or fails to maintain or provide the proof of rejection, the insured’s policy is presumed to include medical-payments benefits of $5,000. Section 10-4-635(1)(c). That presumption is about a policy section 10-4-635 applies to. It is not a number printed on the Uber or Lyft certificate. The policies required by section 40-10.1-604(2) and (3) need not separately satisfy part 6, and section 10-4-635 is in part 6. Neither certificate lists a medical-payments limit. Do not say Uber or Lyft provides $5,000 of Colorado medical payments.

A personal auto policy delivered in Colorado remains under section 10-4-635 for the use that policy covers. Section 40-10.1-604(5) does not require the personal policy to cover logged-in time. Whether a particular personal policy’s medical-payments coverage follows the driver into logged-in use is a question of that policy’s terms. The statute does not answer it with a list of permitted exclusions.

If the policy contains medical-payments coverage, benefits are paid to persons providing medically necessary, accident-related care, with a $5,000 trauma-care reserve and a priority among ambulance, trauma physicians, and trauma centers, held for no more than thirty days after notice of the accident. Section 10-4-635(2). An insurer that pays those benefits has no right to recover them from an owner, user, or operator of a motor vehicle, and no direct cause of action against an alleged tortfeasor for benefits paid under medical-payments coverage. Section 10-4-635(3)(a). That sentence does not modify the collateral-source statute, section 13-21-111.6, or the workers’ compensation act, and it does not prevent the person who received the benefits from pursuing uninsured-motorist coverage under section 10-4-609. Section 10-4-635(3)(b).

The Division’s consumer page says medical-payments coverage pays before health insurance and applies toward health-insurance coinsurance or deductibles. Section 10-4-635 does not contain that sentence.

No statute read for the workers’-compensation rules places transportation network company drivers into a mandatory workers’ compensation system. The workers’ compensation act appears in section 10-4-635(3)(b) only as a statute the medical-payments anti-subrogation sentence does not modify.

The bar is equal or greater fault, and liability is several except concerted action

Contributory negligence does not bar recovery if the plaintiff’s negligence was not as great as the negligence of the person against whom recovery is sought. Damages are then diminished in proportion to the negligence attributable to the person for whose injury recovery is made. If the plaintiff’s negligence is equal to or greater than that person’s negligence, the court enters judgment for the defendant. Section 13-21-111.

In an action for death or injury, a defendant is not liable for an amount greater than that defendant’s percentage of fault. Section 13-21-111.5(1). The exception is concerted action: two or more persons who consciously conspire and deliberately pursue a common plan or design to commit a tortious act. Section 13-21-111.5(4). That is not a general rule of joint and several liability, and it is not pure comparative fault. Any negligence of the plaintiff does not, by itself, bar the claim. Negligence that is equal to or greater than the negligence of the person against whom recovery is sought does.

A nonparty can be added to the fault allocation

A nonparty’s fault may be considered if the claimant settled with that nonparty, or if the defendant designates the nonparty within ninety days after the action is commenced, unless the court allows a longer time. Section 13-21-111.5(3)(b). The jury is told the effect of the plaintiff’s own comparative fault. The jury is not told the effect of the allocation among defendants. Section 13-21-111.5(5).

The statutory bar speaks of “the person against whom recovery is sought.” It does not state a formula for adding several defendants together before applying that comparison.