Acceptance, not the curb, starts Indiana’s $1 million rideshare period

Which records show the ride, the log, and the policy in force?

• The precise times the driver logged on and logged off during the twelve hours before and the twelve hours after the accident, and a clear description of the coverage, exclusions, and limits of policies that provide the section 8 coverage. IC 8-2.1-19.1-12.
• Whether the driver had accepted a request, and when the last requesting rider departed the personal vehicle. That is the prearranged-ride window. IC 8-2.1-17-13.5. Section 12 does not itself itemize the acceptance time.
• Proof of the required coverage, and whether the driver was logged on or engaged in a prearranged ride. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8(e).
• The electronic receipt: origin, destination, total time, distance, and an itemization of the fare. IC 8-2.1-19.1-18. Individual trip records must be kept at least one year from the trip. IC 8-2.1-19.1-16(2).
• The personal auto policy, any rideshare exclusion, and any written rejection of uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, including the date the rejection statute requires.
• The company certificate and the policy in force on the accident date. Uber’s accepted-trip liability form linked for Indiana starts September 1, 2026. Lyft’s State Farm certificate starts October 1, 2026.

IC 8-2.1-19.3 is the delivery-network chapter. It was not found to state the passenger-ride limits in IC 8-2.1-19.1-8. It was not found to state an Indianapolis or airport insurance minimum. Its twelve-hour exchange covers when a delivery available period and a delivery service period began. That exchange was not found to apply to a passenger ride.

Liability changes once, and both tiers are primary

The driver, or the company on the driver’s behalf, must maintain primary motor vehicle insurance, and each tier is primary motor vehicle liability insurance. The requirement may be met by the driver, by the company, or by a combination. The policy language must recognize that the driver is a transportation network company driver, or otherwise uses the personal vehicle to transport passengers for compensation, and it must cover the driver while logged on or on a prearranged ride. The insurer must hold a certificate of authority under IC 27-1-3-20, or the policy must be placed through a surplus-lines producer licensed under IC 27-1-15.8. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8(a).

A policy that meets that subsection satisfies the financial-responsibility requirement of IC 9-25 while the driver is logged on or on a prearranged ride. That sentence does not turn the ordinary 25/50/25 floor into the rideshare floor, and it does not apply when the driver is logged off. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8(d).

Nothing in the chapter allocates a loss between two apps if the driver was logged into more than one. Get both sets of logs anyway.

Section 8’s history line, as read in the 2026 code, is “As added by P.L.175-2015, SEC.10. Amended by P.L.85-2017, SEC.38; P.L.215-2023, SEC.9.” No later amendment appears on that line. The July 1, 2024 property-damage split is in the codified text itself.

The $1 million period ends when the last requesting rider departs

“Prearranged ride” means transportation by a transportation network company driver to a requesting rider, beginning when the driver accepts the rider’s request through a digital network the company controls, continuing while the driver transports the requesting rider, and ending when the last requesting rider departs from the personal vehicle. IC 8-2.1-17-13.5(a).

The statute does not keep that period open until the trip is marked complete in the app, and it does not keep it open until unloading is finished. It ends when the last requesting rider gets out of the personal vehicle. On a shared ride, an earlier drop-off does not end it. The period stays open until the last requesting rider departs.

For liability limits, the drive to the pickup and the time a requesting rider is in the vehicle are the same tier. The disclosure the driver must give after an accident, on request, is proof of the section 8 coverage and whether the driver was logged on or engaged in a prearranged ride. It is not a third status called “passenger already seated.” That information may be electronic under IC 27-1-43-3. The driver must carry proof of the required coverage while using the personal vehicle in connection with the digital network. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8(e).

The term does not include a shared-expense carpool or vanpool, a taxicab, limousine, or other for-hire vehicle, or a regional transportation authority under IC 36-9-3. IC 8-2.1-17-13.5(b). A personal vehicle operated by a transportation network company driver is also outside the for-hire registration chapter, and a personal vehicle is not a taxicab. IC 8-2.1-19-3 and IC 8-2.1-17-16. That is not a second insurance schedule.

Waiting-period property damage is $50,000, and a 2023 bulletin still says $25,000

After June 30, 2024, the logged-on floor is 50/100 for death and bodily injury and $50,000 for property damage. Before July 1, 2024, the same subsection required $25,000 of property damage. Ordinary financial responsibility, when the driver is logged off, is still 25/50/25. The current rideshare waiting tier is higher than that ordinary floor on both bodily injury and property damage. Uber’s current waiting-period certificate prints 50/100/50. One Lyft row prints $50,000 / $100,000 bodily injury and $50,000 property damage. Those company figures match the current statute. They are not extra coverage above a $25,000 rideshare floor.

The Department of Revenue issues the permit. “Department” means the department of state revenue. IC 8-2.1-17-6. A permit is valid for one year, and the permit condition is that the company impose insurance requirements that meet or exceed section 8. IC 8-2.1-19.1-1 and IC 8-2.1-19.1-3(3). A violation of the chapter is a Class A infraction. IC 8-2.1-19.1-20. That infraction is not a statement of the civil liability limit, and it is not a damages cap.

General Tax Information Bulletin #301 (March 2023) still recites $25,000 of waiting-period property damage. The bulletin says it replaces the December 2019 version and that only nonsubstantive changes were made. It is behind the codified $50,000 figure. Use the bulletin for the identity of the permitting agency and for the non-carrier classification. It does not state the current property-damage floor. The same bulletin says a company that contracts with an Indiana motor carrier, common carrier, or contract carrier to provide transportation through the digital network must also hold a broker’s license and a $10,000 surety bond. That bond is not the auto liability limit.

Before the company lets a driver accept a request, it must disclose in writing the types of coverage and the limits it provides while the driver uses a personal vehicle in connection with the digital network, and that the driver’s own policy may not provide coverage while logged on or on a prearranged ride. IC 8-2.1-19.1-9.

A $1 million liability floor is not uninsured-motorist coverage

Liability coverage responds when the rideshare driver is legally responsible for the accident. Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage respond, when a policy actually provides them, to a different problem: the other motorist.

The rideshare insurance section does not mention uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage at either tier. The exclusion section does. A personal policy may exclude “uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage” while the driver is logged on or on a prearranged ride. IC 8-2.1-19.1-10(b)(2). Permission to exclude is not a requirement to buy.

Uber’s current Indiana certificate says uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage “is not included in any amount,” both while the driver is waiting and after acceptance, including while en route and while traveling to the destination. Lyft’s current Indiana certificate does not state an uninsured-motorist limit, and it does not state that the coverage is excluded. Silence on Lyft’s form is not the same sentence as Uber’s. Neither certificate shows an uninsured-motorist limit of $50,000, $1 million, or zero; Uber’s says only that the coverage is “not included in any amount.” A passenger, a driver, or another occupant may still have that coverage on a policy that actually applies to that person. The certificates do not identify who is an insured for it, because they do not grant it.

If someone else is at fault and uninsured, section 8 does not supply uninsured-motorist coverage, and neither current certificate shows it. The people in the other vehicle, a pedestrian, or a bicyclist look to the at-fault driver’s liability insurance. During a rideshare period, if the rideshare driver is the one who is liable, that liability insurance is the primary coverage section 8 requires, at 50/100/50 or $1 million per incident depending on whether a prearranged ride has begun.

What an ordinary personal policy must offer

General uninsured and underinsured motorist law is IC 27-7-5-2. For an automobile or motor vehicle liability policy delivered or issued for delivery in Indiana on a motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in Indiana, the insurer must make uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage available. Unless rejected in writing, those coverages must be provided in limits at least equal to the bodily-injury liability limits of the insured’s policy. Underinsured motorist coverage must be made available in limits of not less than $50,000, and an insurer may not sell it for less than $50,000. The opening clauses also allow the offer to be made at limits not less than the 25/50/25 financial-responsibility schedule, either with property damage or as bodily injury only.

The Indiana Department of Insurance auto page and its Auto Insurance Facts sheet state consumer minimums of uninsured-motorist bodily injury $25,000 / $50,000, underinsured-motorist bodily injury $50,000, and, on the facts sheet, uninsured-motorist property damage of $25,000 for policies issued on or after July 1, 2017. Those pages also say each newly written Indiana auto liability policy must include the coverages unless rejected in writing. Read them as the department’s statement of floors and of the rejection right. They do not erase the statutory default. Absent a written rejection, the limits are at least equal to the policy’s bodily-injury liability limits. A policy with bodily-injury liability above 25/50 is not automatically a 25/50 uninsured-motorist policy.

A named insured may reject, in writing, both coverages, or either coverage if the coverage not rejected is provided separately. The rejection is on behalf of all named insureds, all other insureds, and all other persons entitled to coverage. It must specify whether uninsured motorist, underinsured motorist, or both are rejected, and the date the rejection is effective. After a rejection, the insurer need not offer the rejected coverage again on a renewal or replacement issued to the same insured by the same insurer, or by a subsidiary or affiliate, unless the insured later requests it in writing. A renewal that has been endorsed in the interim is not a newly issued policy for this purpose. IC 27-7-5-2(b) and (c). The rejection cannot be oral, and the statute does not require a fresh signature at every renewal.

No insured may have uninsured-motorist property-damage coverage under this section unless that insured also has uninsured-motorist bodily-injury coverage. The rejection statute describes a rejection of the coverage. It does not describe a signed form for selecting a limit below the liability limit but at or above the $50,000 underinsured floor. Check with an Indiana attorney before relying on a particular selection form.

“Underinsured motor vehicle” includes an insured motor vehicle whose liability limits available for payment to the insured, under all bodily-injury liability policies covering persons liable to the insured, are less than the insured’s underinsured motorist limits at the time of the accident. It does not include an uninsured motor vehicle. IC 27-7-5-4(b). That is a comparison of limits. It is not a test of whether the other driver’s limits are less than the claimant’s damages.

The most payable for bodily injury under uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage is the lesser of two differences: the difference between the amount paid in damages to the insured by or for any person who may be liable and the per-person limit, or the difference between the insured’s total damages and the amount paid by or for any person liable for the bodily injury. IC 27-7-5-5(c). That is a statutory reduction by amounts already paid. It is not a rule that the benefit is paid without regard to the liability recovery.

The policy may provide that the total limit of all insurers’ liability from one accident shall not exceed the highest limits under any one policy applicable to the loss, but not below the IC 9-25-4-5 minimum. IC 27-7-5-5(a). That is permission for an anti-stacking clause. It is not a holding that stacking is always barred. When the coverage is written on one or more motor vehicles under a single policy, it applies only to the vehicles for which a specific premium was charged. IC 27-7-5-5(b).

Uninsured-motorist property damage must additionally be offered, without a deductible, and may be offered with a deductible of not more than the first $300. The deductible is waived if the insured motor vehicle is legally parked and unoccupied. Recoverable property damage is limited to the insured motor vehicle and the insured’s personal property in it, and does not include loss of use. A property-damage claim under this chapter must include the name and address of the at-fault operator and information establishing that the operator is without liability insurance. “There shall be no liability imposed upon an insurer where the owner or operator of the other vehicle cannot be identified.” IC 27-7-5-3. That sentence is about property damage. The bodily-injury definition of an uninsured motor vehicle is a vehicle without liability insurance, or not in compliance with IC 9-25 or a similar law of another state, and it includes insolvency of the liability insurer within two years after the accident, for an accident during a policy period when the coverage was in effect. IC 27-7-5-4(a) and (c). That bodily-injury definition does not, in terms, add an unidentified-driver rule.

A 2026 amendment, effective July 1, 2026, adds that a policy providing coverage in excess of a self-insured retention is considered a commercial umbrella or excess liability policy. Commercial umbrella and excess policies are not required to offer uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage. House Enrolled Act 1260, P.L.86-2026, section 18. That amendment is not a rideshare uninsured-motorist mandate.

The general offer rule applies to a policy delivered or issued for delivery in Indiana with respect to a motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in Indiana. The named insureds on the Uber and Lyft certificates use San Francisco addresses. A separate subsection says an insurer is not required to make the coverage available on certain commercial property-and-casualty policies for a non-owned motor vehicle used as the insured authorized. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8 does not require the company policy to carry uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage. Check with an Indiana attorney before relying on how either rule applies to a company policy on a driver’s personal car.

What Farmers prints for Uber is not what State Farm prints for Lyft

The statutory floor is the same for both companies. The certificates are not the same document. They name different insurers, they use different dates, and only one of them describes which app status a policy covers. Both files were opened October 3, 2026. Neither lists personal injury protection, medical payments, a positive uninsured-motorist amount, or a higher airport liability limit.

Uber

The Indiana file linked from Uber’s U.S. certificates list is issued by Farmers Insurance Exchange, NAIC 21652. The producer address on the form is 6303 Owensmouth Ave., 4th Floor, Woodland Hills. The insureds are Rasier, LLC, Rasier-CA, LLC, Rasier-DC, LLC, and Rasier-PA, LLC. The authorized representative printed on each page is Paul H Chang. The certificate face does not contain the sentence “State of Indiana.” State identification is Uber’s certificates index plus certificate numbers that begin IN-UBER-RASIER. Uber Indiana certificate of liability insurance.

• Available and waiting. Certificate number IN-UBER-RASIER-PERIOD1. Certificate date March 1, 2026. Policy 606715826. Policy period March 1, 2026 to March 1, 2027. Covered autos, as the description states, are those used by a driver logged into the UberPartner application and available to receive requests, but who has not recorded acceptance of a request. Limits printed: bodily injury $50,000 per person, bodily injury $100,000 per accident, property damage $50,000 per accident. The description says uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage “is not included in any amount.”
• After acceptance. Certificate number IN-UBER-RASIER-PERIOD2/3. Certificate date September 1, 2026. Policy 606715827. Policy period printed on the form: September 1, 2026 to March 1, 2027. Covered autos: the driver is logged into the UberPartner application, has logged and recorded acceptance of a request, and is en route to the pickup or traveling to the final destination. Limit printed: $1,000,000 combined single limit (each accident). The separate bodily-injury and property-damage cells are blank. The description again says uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage “is not included in any amount.” There is no sentence that raises this limit on airport premises. The September 1 start is what the certificate prints. It is not a March 1 start.
• Physical damage. Certificate number IN-UBER-RASIER-PD. Certificate date March 1, 2026. Policy 606715827PD. Policy period March 1, 2026 to March 1, 2027. Comprehensive deductible $2,500. Collision deductible $2,500. The limit is the lesser of actual cash value and cost of repair. The covered-auto window matches the accepted-trip window. Then the form says coverage applies only if, at the time of loss, the auto was insured for collision under a personal auto policy that includes the driver as an insured or the auto as a covered auto. That contingency names collision. It does not name comprehensive.

As of October 3, 2026, the waiting-period policy and the physical-damage policy sit inside a March 1, 2026 to March 1, 2027 period, and the accepted-trip liability policy sits inside its printed September 1, 2026 to March 1, 2027 period. The currently linked file does not contain an accepted-trip liability certificate for March 1, 2026 through August 31, 2026. Check with an Indiana attorney before relying on this certificate for a loss between March 1 and August 31, 2026. A loss outside the printed dates needs the form that was actually in force.

Uber’s general insurance page uses countrywide sentences, including a repair description that is contingent on the driver maintaining comprehensive and collision. The Indiana certificate is the document that prints 50/100/50, the September 1 accepted-trip date, no uninsured-motorist coverage, and a collision-only contingency. The general page’s comprehensive-and-collision sentence is not what that certificate says.

The certificate states an “insured for collision at the time of loss” condition, and the statute allows the personal exclusion. Check with an Indiana attorney before relying on that condition when a personal policy excludes collision during rideshare use.

Lyft

Lyft’s current Indiana certificate is issued by State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, NAIC 25143. No other insurer is listed on the form. The certificate date is October 1, 2026. The certificate-number field is blank. The producer is Daniel Martin, State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, 2702 Ireland Grove Rd, Bloomington. The insured is Lyft, Inc., 185 Berry Street, Suite 400, San Francisco. The description of operations says “Evidence of Insurance Only For the State of IN.” The policies run October 1, 2026 through October 1, 2027. Lyft Indiana certificate of liability insurance. The help page that listed this file, as fetched October 3, 2026, did not list a prior Indiana certificate.

• Policy 0000010-D01-14, row labeled “NON-OWNED AUTOS ONLY.” Bodily injury $50,000 per person and $100,000 per accident, and property damage $50,000 per accident.
• Policy 0000011-D01-14. Combined single limit $1,000,000 each accident. The per-person and per-accident bodily-injury cells, and the property-damage cell, are blank on that row.
• Policy0000012-D01-14. Hired autos and non-owned autos are marked. No liability dollar limit is printed on that row.

Additional remarks on page 2 name policies 0000011-D01-14 and 0000012-D01-14 only. They state a coverage expiration of October 1, 2027, a comprehensive deductible of $2,500, a collision deductible of $2,500, and a limit of actual cash value or the cost to repair, whichever is less, less the $2,500 deductible. The remarks do not say this physical-damage coverage depends on the driver carrying personal collision or comprehensive. They do not say which app status it applies to. They do not attach the deductibles to policy 0000010. Check with an Indiana attorney before relying on what coverage policy 0000012 affords.

The certificate does not define a waiting period, an accepted trip, or a prearranged ride, and it does not label the rows as periods. The dollar figures can be lined up against the statute: 0000010 prints the same 50/100 and $50,000 property damage as the current waiting-period floor, and 0000011 is the only row with a printed $1 million combined single limit. The form itself does not say which policy covers which app status. It also does not call 0000010 a waiting-period limit.

No uninsured or underinsured motorist figure appears. No sentence says that coverage is excluded. No personal injury protection, medical payments, or airport limit appears. Footer codes “04-13-2022” and “04-14-2023” are form-print identifiers. They are not policy effective dates.

For an accident before October 1, 2026, this certificate’s policy period has not started. Check with an Indiana attorney about the insurer and limits for an earlier loss.

Lyft’s state-and-local disclosures warn Indiana drivers that a personal policy may not provide liability, collision, comprehensive, uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage, personal injury protection, or medical payments while logged in or on a prearranged ride, depending on its terms, and they point drivers to Lyft’s certificates. That is a disclosure. It is not a statement that the Indiana certificate includes personal injury protection. The certificate does not list it. Where the disclosure groups Indiana drivers with drivers somewhere else, that grouping is not a statement that the insurance is the same.

If the personal policy excludes the trip, the company policy owes the required liability from the first dollar

An insurer that writes motor vehicle insurance in Indiana may exclude coverage under a policy issued to an owner or operator of a personal vehicle for a loss while the driver is logged on to a digital network or engaged in a prearranged ride. The exclusion includes any coverage in the policy, including liability for death, bodily injury, and property damage; uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage; medical payments; comprehensive; and collision. The statute names those coverages. It does not name personal injury protection. The lead-in is broader than the list: an authorized exclusion includes any coverage in the policy. A personal policy that happened to include a personal-injury-protection-like benefit could be excluded during logged-on or prearranged-ride use because the statute says “any coverage.” That is not a statement that Indiana policies contain personal injury protection. The exclusion applies notwithstanding IC 9-25. IC 8-2.1-19.1-10(a), (b), and (c).

The chapter does not require a personal policy to cover logged-on use, a prearranged ride, or other use of a personal vehicle to transport passengers for compensation. It also does not preclude an insurer from providing that coverage by contract or endorsement. IC 8-2.1-19.1-10(d).

An insurer that uses the exclusion has no duty to defend or indemnify a claim that is expressly excluded. The chapter does not invalidate an older exclusion for a personal vehicle used to carry a person or property for a charge, or available for hire by the public, including a policy filed under IC 27-1-22-4 or in use in Indiana before July 1, 2015. An older for-hire exclusion can be broader than the logged-on window. Read the policy. The statute does not say an insurer is forbidden to deny a logged-off personal claim merely because the car is sometimes used for rideshare trips. The exclusion’s stated window is logged-on use and prearranged rides. IC 8-2.1-19.1-11(a) and (b).

An insurer that defends or indemnifies a driver for a claim its own policy excludes has a right of contribution against another insurer that issued the driver coverage satisfying section 8 and in effect at the time of the loss. IC 8-2.1-19.1-11(c).

If insurance maintained by the driver lapses or does not provide the required coverage, insurance maintained by the company must provide the required coverage beginning with the first dollar of a claim, and the insurer that issues that company insurance has a duty to defend. Company coverage may not depend on a personal insurer denying the claim first, and the personal insurer may not be required to deny first. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8(b) and (c). “Required” in that section is the liability schedule. It does not require the company to buy uninsured-motorist coverage, medical payments, comprehensive, or collision. The first-dollar rule does not rewrite Uber’s “not included in any amount” sentence into an uninsured-motorist grant, and it does not drop the driver’s exclusion.

Repair money, when a company policy actually provides it

The statute does not require comprehensive or collision. If the company’s insurance does provide that coverage for a repair to the personal vehicle, the company must direct the insurer to pay the repairer directly, as payment in full for the completed repairs, or jointly to the owner and any primary lienholder. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8(f). Uber’s certificate limits its $2,500 physical-damage form to the accepted-trip window and conditions it on personal collision at the time of loss. Lyft’s certificate states $2,500 deductibles and actual cash value or repair cost, whichever is less, on the remarks for policies 0000011 and 0000012, without that personal-collision sentence and without an app-status definition.

A transportation network company and a transportation network company driver are not a common carrier, a contract carrier, or a motor carrier. IC 8-2.1-19.1-2. Unless a written contract provides otherwise, a driver who connects to the digital network is an independent contractor, and the company is not considered to control the driver or to own, control, operate, or manage the personal vehicle. IC 8-2.1-19.1-4. Those sentences are not insurance limits.

Indiana is not a no-fault state, and neither certificate lists a medical-payments limit

IC 9-25-4-5 sets liability minimums only. IC 8-2.1-19.1-8 does not require personal injury protection or medical payments. Fault still matters to a bodily-injury claim, under the rule in the next section.

The Department of Insurance describes medical payments as a typical auto coverage that pays medical bills of the insured and, usually, passengers, up to the policy limit, for injury while riding in, entering, or getting out of the car. It describes that coverage as one policies typically provide, not as a required no-fault benefit. The same consumer materials do not describe a mandatory personal injury protection schedule. The rideshare exclusion statute names “medical payments coverage.” It does not name personal injury protection.

Neither the Uber certificate nor the Lyft certificate lists a medical-payments or personal injury protection dollar figure. Neither company certificate states one. Medical payments, when a policy actually provides it, is first-party. On the department’s description, it is aimed at the insured and passengers of that car. It is not liability coverage for a pedestrian, a bicyclist, or a person in the other vehicle.

Fault reduces the award, and it bars recovery only above 50 percent

In an action based on fault, the claimant’s contributory fault diminishes proportionately the amount awarded as compensatory damages, and it does not bar recovery except as the next section provides. IC 34-51-2-5. The claimant is barred if the claimant’s contributory fault is greater than the fault of all persons whose fault proximately contributed to the damages. IC 34-51-2-6. The jury instruction states that bar as the claimant’s fault “greater than fifty percent (50%)” of total fault. IC 34-51-2-7(b)(2), and the same line for multiple defendants in IC 34-51-2-8(b)(2). Fifty percent is not a bar. More than fifty percent is.

The jury assigns fault to nonparties as well, and the parties’ fault may total less than 100 percent. There is no right of contribution among tortfeasors under this chapter. Indemnity is preserved. IC 34-51-2-12. This is a damages rule. It is not a coverage tier, and it does not change the $1 million liability ceiling.

The chapter does not apply to tort claims against governmental entities or public employees under the tort claims act.IC 34-51-2-2. The chapter does not say what fault rule then applies to a government defendant.

Check Indianapolis and airport rules before relying on a different limit

Check with an Indiana attorney or the Indianapolis and airport rules before relying on a liability limit different from IC 8-2.1-19.1-8. The airport’s Uber and Lyft page describes the Ground Transportation Center for pickups and the main terminal for drop-offs. It does not state an insurance minimum. Neither current certificate states a higher limit on airport premises.

Chapter 19.1 does not contain a local-preemption section. Check with an Indiana attorney before relying on an administrative rule that sets a different rideshare insurance limit.