Acceptance raises liability to $1,500,000. Uninsured coverage stays at 25/50.

From 50/100/30 at period 1 to $1,500,000 in periods 2 and 3

The auto periods are defined in Minn. Stat. § 181C.01, subdivision 4, and incorporated by section 65B.472, subdivision 1(d). Period 1 is the time a driver is logged into a transportation network company application but has not accepted a ride offer. Period 2 is the time a driver is proceeding to pick up a rider after choosing to accept a ride offer. Period 3 is the time a driver is transporting a rider from a pickup location to a drop-off location. The labor statute also labels those windows P1, P2, and P3. Period 2 starts at acceptance, so the drive to the pickup is already inside the $1,500,000 auto period. The rider does not have to be in the car.

What applies if you were the rider?

Acceptance is the switch. Before it, the auto liability floor is $50,000 / $100,000 / $30,000. After it, through the drive to the pickup and while the rider is being transported, the floor is $1,500,000. § 65B.472. Uninsured and underinsured coverage stay at $25,000 / $50,000 under § 65B.49, subdivisions 3a and 4a. They do not rise to $1,500,000. Subdivision 3a does not contain a written-rejection right.

Basic economic loss for an occupant points at the security covering that car. The statutory minimum is $20,000 medical and $20,000 for the other losses § 65B.44 requires, with priority under § 65B.47. The certificates say personal injury protection is included. They do not print those dollars. The $1,000,000 accident-and-sickness policy is for the driver. It does not pay a passenger. Do not stretch the $1,500,000 auto figure through finished unloading. The citation page, as read October 3, 2026, does not settle whether the end of period 3 and the last rider’s departure are the same moment. That point is in when the higher auto limit stops.

What applies if you were the driver?

The same auto periods apply. From January 1, 2025, the company must also maintain, at no cost to the driver, a separate blanket accident-and-sickness policy of not less than $1,000,000 per incident for the driver’s own injury during periods 2 and 3, including injury at the drop-off immediately after the prearranged ride ends. It is not workers’ compensation. It does not apply in period 1. A personal policy may exclude coverage during periods 1, 2, and 3, including basic economic loss. § 65B.472, subd. 4.

Uber’s occupational paragraph does not print $1,000,000. Lyft’s occupational page states a medical maximum of $1,000,000 and a disability benefit equal to 66 percent of average weekly earnings. Those are company descriptions, not a second statutory dollar. The current Lyft certificate does not print a period 3 liability dollar. The detail is in the driver’s own injury and the certificates.

Basic economic loss sits beside those columns, not inside the $1,500,000. During period 1, and again during periods 2 and 3, the policy must provide security for basic economic loss benefits where section 65B.44 requires them, under the priority in section 65B.47. The statutory minimum is $20,000 medical and $20,000 other. The certificates discussed below say personal injury protection is included. Neither prints those dollars.

The auto requirement may be satisfied by driver insurance, company insurance, or any combination. § 65B.472, subd. 2(b)(4) and (c)(4). The $1,000,000 driver policy is not optional in that way. A transportation network company must maintain it on behalf of, and at no cost to, the driver. The company may buy it with a portion of the fare. A driver shall not be charged, or have compensation lowered, because of that insurance.

The required auto coverage is primary. If the driver’s policy has lapsed or does not provide the required coverage, the company’s insurance provides the coverage required by the subdivision beginning with the first dollar of a claim and has the duty to defend. Company auto coverage shall not be dependent on a personal automobile insurer first denying a claim, and the personal policy is not required to deny first. § 65B.472, subd. 2(a), (b)(4), (c)(4), (i), and (j). The statute does not contain a further sentence that turns the company policy into excess merely because the driver has some coverage below the required amount.

Insurance required by subdivision 2 must satisfy the requirements of chapter 60A, and it is deemed to satisfy the financial-responsibility requirements of the No-Fault Act, sections 65B.41 to 65B.71. § 65B.472, subd. 2(k) and (l). The section does not say “admitted carrier only.” Whether a particular surplus-lines placement complies is not settled.

Before January 1, 2025, the published statute did not use the labels period 1, period 2, and period 3. It required 50/100/30 while a participating driver was logged on and available to receive requests but not engaged in a prearranged ride, and $1,500,000 while the driver was engaged in a prearranged ride. The prearranged ride already began at acceptance and ended when the last rider departed. The 2024 rewrite, effective January 1, 2025, kept those auto dollars and added the driver injury policy, the reduction of statutory uninsured and underinsured coverage by that policy, and the period labels. Laws 2024, chapter 127, article 17, section 1. The governor signed chapter 127 on May 24, 2024. The 2023 published section is the text that already contained $1,500,000 and did not contain the $1,000,000 driver policy.

The Department of Labor and Industry’s transportation-network page states, as an implementation line, that new insurance requirements for companies operating in Minnesota began January 1, 2025. The page says its overview is informational only and is not a source of law. That sentence matches the session-law effective date. It is not a statement that 50/100/30 and $1,500,000 were new on that date. DLI, protections for transportation network company drivers.

The last rider’s departure ends the prearranged ride

“Prearranged ride” means transportation beginning when a driver accepts a ride requested by a rider through a digital network the company controls, continuing while the driver transports a requesting rider, and ending when the last requesting rider departs from the personal vehicle. § 65B.472, subd. 1(i). There is no test that keeps the period open until the later of app completion or finished unloading.

Period 3 is a different sentence. It is the time when a driver is transporting a rider from a pickup location to a drop-off location. § 181C.01, subd. 4(3). The $1,500,000 liability sentence is “during” period 2 and period 3. It does not say the figure continues on the curb after the ride, and it does not say unloading keeps it open. Do not stretch $1,500,000 through finished unloading.

Those two ending points are not the same sentence. The citation page, as read October 3, 2026, does not settle the overlap, if any, between the end of period 3 and the end of a prearranged ride. They are not collapsed into one clock.

The $1,000,000 driver policy, and only that policy, expressly includes personal injury sustained while at the drop-off location immediately following the conclusion of a prearranged ride. § 65B.472, subd. 2(d). “Personal injury,” for that policy, means a physical injury or mental impairment arising out of a physical injury in the course of a prearranged ride. A personal injury is only covered if the injury occurs to a driver during period 2 or period 3, except as provided in that drop-off sentence. The claimant is subject to the requirements of section 65B.56. § 65B.472, subd. 1(g). Passengers are not the insureds of paragraph (d).

“Maintenance or use of a motor vehicle” includes occupying, entering into, and alighting from it. It does not include loading and unloading unless the conduct occurs while occupying, entering into, or alighting from it. § 65B.43, subd. 3. That definition can matter at the curb. It is not an extension of the $1,500,000 liability period through finished unloading.

On a shared ride, an earlier drop-off does not end the prearranged ride. Subdivision 1(i) ends it when the last requesting rider departs. The statute’s only sharing rule for the driver injury policy is contribution: if blanket accident-and-sickness insurance maintained by more than one company covers the injury, the insurer against whom the claim is filed is entitled to contribution for the pro rata share attributable to the other companies, up to the coverages and limits in paragraph (d). § 65B.472, subd. 2(g). That is not a rule that auto liability is split equally among every app the driver was logged into before a match. The auto section does not contain that equal-sharing sentence.

Before the company lets the driver accept a request, it must disclose in writing the coverage and limits it provides under subdivision 2, paragraphs (b), (c), and (d); that the driver’s own policy might not provide any coverage while logged on and available, or during a prearranged ride, depending on its terms; and that using a vehicle with a lien may violate the driver’s contract with the lienholder. § 65B.472, subd. 3. The lienholder sentence affects the driver’s contract with the lender. It is not the injured person’s liability limit.

The 25/50 floor does not rise with the $1,500,000

Liability coverage responds when the rideshare driver is legally responsible for someone else’s loss. Uninsured and underinsured coverage respond to a different problem: the other motorist. Minnesota requires both, as separate coverages, and it does not raise either one to $1,500,000 because rideshare liability stepped up.

No plan of reparation security may be renewed, delivered or issued for delivery, or executed in this state for a motor vehicle registered or principally garaged here unless separate uninsured and underinsured motorist coverages are provided. Each, at a minimum, must provide $25,000 because of injury to or death of one person in any accident and $50,000 because of injury to or death of two or more persons in any accident. The amount available to any one person in a multi-person accident must not exceed the one-person limit. Every owner of a motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state shall maintain those coverages. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(1) and (2). The subdivision does not contain a written-rejection right. Do not describe this coverage as optional.

No reparation obligor is required to provide uninsured or underinsured limits in excess of the bodily injury liability limit of the applicable plan. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(3). That is a ceiling on what must be offered above the liability limit. It is not a command that uninsured coverage equal $1,500,000 because transportation-network liability is $1,500,000. Section 65B.472 says primary uninsured coverage and primary underinsured coverage “where required by” subdivisions 3a and 4a, in the period 1 paragraph and again in the period 2 and period 3 paragraph. It does not say “$1,500,000 uninsured.”

The definitions are in section 65B.43. An uninsured motor vehicle is one for which a plan of reparation security meeting sections 65B.41 to 65B.71 is not in effect. An underinsured motor vehicle is one to which a bodily-injury liability policy applies but its limit for bodily injury liability is less than the amount needed to compensate the insured for actual damages. That is a damages comparison, not a simple test of whether the other policy’s limits sit below the claimant’s limits. Uninsured motorist coverage is for persons insured under that coverage who are legally entitled to recover damages for bodily injury from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles and hit-and-run motor vehicles. Underinsured motorist coverage is the parallel coverage for underinsured motor vehicles. Subdivisions 16 through 19.

No uninsured-motorist property-damage requirement appears in section 65B.49, subdivision 3a, or in section 65B.472. Basic economic loss benefits do not include benefits for physical damage to property, including motor vehicles and their contents. § 65B.44, subd. 8. The $25,000 / $50,000 figures are not a property-damage benefit.

Hit-and-run is named. Extra proof rules are not.

The uninsured-motorist definition includes hit-and-run motor vehicles. § 65B.43, subd. 18. Those sections do not contain a corroboration rule or a police-report rule for a no-contact hit-and-run. Whether a no-contact phantom vehicle has proof requirements beyond those words is not settled.

For underinsured coverage, the maximum liability of an insurer is the amount of damages sustained but not recovered from the insurance policy of the driver or owner of any underinsured at-fault vehicle. If the person is injured by two or more vehicles, underinsured coverage is payable whenever any one of those vehicles meets the definition. In no event shall the underinsured carrier have to pay more than its underinsured limits. § 65B.49, subd. 4a. That is damages not recovered from the at-fault policy, capped at the underinsured limit. It is not a limits-difference formula written into the statute.

Two reductions sit on uninsured and underinsured coverage, and they are different. No recovery is permitted under those coverages for basic economic loss benefits paid or payable, or which would be payable but for any applicable deductible. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(4). Basic economic loss is not collected again as uninsured coverage. Separately, amounts paid or payable under the coverages required by section 65B.49, subdivisions 3a and 4a, shall be reduced by the total amount of benefits paid or payable under the driver accident-and-sickness policy in section 65B.472, subdivision 2(d). § 65B.472, subd. 2(h). That sentence does not say “to the same claimant only.” Paragraph (d) benefits are payable for a driver’s personal injury, not a passenger’s. Whether a passenger’s uninsured coverage is reduced by benefits paid to the driver is not spelled out. A passenger is not told that their uninsured coverage is reduced by the driver’s benefits, and a driver is not told that it is not.

Paragraph (d) pays loss the auto policy does not cover. Paragraph (h) reduces uninsured coverage. The order is not settled.

Paragraph (d) pays personal-injury loss that is not otherwise covered by the insurance required under paragraphs (b) and (c). Those paragraphs include the required uninsured and underinsured coverage. Paragraph (h) then reduces that uninsured and underinsured coverage by what paragraph (d) pays. The citation page does not settle which dollar is calculated first. Both sentences are in the statute. No payment waterfall is published.

Stacking of uninsured and underinsured limits is barred in the statute’s own words. Regardless of the number of policies, vehicles, persons covered, claims made, vehicles or premiums shown on the policy, or premiums paid, the limit of liability for uninsured and underinsured coverages for two or more motor vehicles shall not be added together to determine the limit available to an injured person for any one accident. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(6). There is no election to stack those coverages. Basic economic loss is the opposite: limits for two or more motor vehicles may not be added together unless the policyholder makes a specific election to stack them, and the insurer must notify policyholders that they may elect to stack. § 65B.47, subd. 7.

If the injured person is occupying a motor vehicle, the limit of uninsured and underinsured coverage available to that person is the limit specified for that motor vehicle. If that person is occupying a vehicle of which the person is not an insured, the person may be entitled to excess protection from a policy in which the injured person is otherwise insured. That excess is limited to covered damages, and it is available only to the extent the limit of like coverage on any one vehicle listed on the injured person’s own policy exceeds the limit available from the occupied vehicle. If the person is not occupying a motor vehicle or motorcycle, the person is entitled to select any one limit of liability for any one vehicle afforded by a policy under which the injured person is insured. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(5). A passenger’s own higher limit can matter, as excess only, and only for the difference. A personal-auto exclusion of uninsured and underinsured coverage during periods 1, 2, and 3 is expressly permitted and would remove that excess if the policy uses it. § 65B.472, subd. 4(a)(2). The company certificates do not decide whether a particular personal policy has that exclusion.

Uninsured and underinsured coverage do not apply to bodily injury of the insured while occupying a motor vehicle owned by the insured, unless the occupied vehicle is an insured motor vehicle, and they do not apply to injury while occupying a motorcycle the insured owns. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(7) and (8).

The time limit for commencing a cause of action relating to underinsured motorist coverage under subdivision 3a is four years from the date of accrual. § 65B.49, subd. 10(b). That four-year sentence is not the tort limitations period and not the six-year contract period in subdivision 10(a).

Basic economic loss is $20,000 medical and $20,000 other

A policy providing benefits for injuries arising out of the maintenance or use of a motor vehicle may not be issued or renewed for a vehicle registered or principally garaged here unless it requires the insurer to pay basic economic loss benefits regardless of the fault of the insured. § 65B.49, subd. 1. Each plan of reparation security shall provide for payment of basic economic loss benefits. Subdivision 2.

The minimum in section 65B.44, subdivision 1(a), is $40,000 for loss arising out of the injury of any one person, consisting of $20,000 for medical expense loss and a total of $20,000 for income loss, replacement services loss, funeral expense loss, survivor’s economic loss, and survivor’s replacement services loss. A person entitled to basic economic loss benefits is entitled to the full medical expense benefits in subdivision 2 and may not receive medical benefits in any way less than those, or benefits with any preestablished limitations. Medical expenses must be reasonable and necessary. No reparation obligor or health-plan company may contract to provide managed care services to no-fault claimants. Subdivision 1(b) and (c).

Inside the $20,000 non-medical pool, the current section sets weekly and funeral caps. Disability and income loss is 85 percent of the loss of present and future gross income, maximum $500 per week. Weekly maximums may not be prorated to a daily maximum. Funeral and burial expenses are reasonable expenses not in excess of $5,000. Replacement services are a maximum of $200 per week, and all replacement services loss on the date of injury and the first seven days after is excluded. If death occurs within one year, survivors’ economic loss is a maximum of $500 per week, and survivors’ replacement services are a maximum of $200 per week. § 65B.44, subds. 3 through 7. An election available to certain insureds age 65, or age 60 and retired, is not a rideshare rule.

Section 65B.472 does not restate these dollars. It requires security for the payment of basic economic loss benefits where required by section 65B.44, pursuant to the priority in section 65B.47. “Where required” is the incorporation. It is not a statement that every company certificate must print $20,000 / $20,000. No mandatory dollar deductible appears in sections 65B.44 or 65B.49 as read. Benefits are “subject to any applicable deductibles.” Do not invent a standard deductible.

For an occupant of the rideshare car, priority points at that car

Injury to the driver or other occupant, if the accident occurs while the vehicle is being used in the business of transporting persons or property, is paid by the security covering the vehicle or, if none, the security under which the injured person is an insured. § 65B.47, subd. 1. Section 65B.472 deems the company and the driver to be in that business during period 1, and again during periods 2 and 3, and deems the required insurance to cover the vehicle. For the driver and for a passenger in the rideshare vehicle, the priority the statute points to is the security covering that vehicle, not the injured person’s own auto policy first.

Section 65B.47, subdivision 1a(5), says subdivision 1 does not apply to a passenger in a taxi. The rideshare section does not give rideshare passengers that carve-out. It puts them into subdivision 1 by the deemer. Do not treat a rideshare passenger’s basic economic loss priority as if the passenger were a taxi passenger.

A person who is not a driver or occupant of another involved vehicle, and whose injury arises from the use of a vehicle described in subdivision 1, looks to the security covering that vehicle. § 65B.47, subd. 3. A pedestrian struck by the rideshare car is in that sentence if the rideshare car is the subdivision 1 vehicle. A person occupying the other car is not in that sentence, because that person is a driver or occupant of another involved motor vehicle. That person falls under subdivision 4: an insured’s own security comes first. § 65B.47, subd. 4(a). Do not say every victim’s basic economic loss is the company’s.

If two obligations apply, benefits are payable only once. The obligor against whom the claim is asserted pays as if wholly responsible and then has pro rata contribution. § 65B.47, subd. 5.

Section 65B.472 does not require medical payments coverage. It lists medical payments only as one of the coverages a personal auto insurer may exclude during periods 1, 2, and 3. Neither current certificate discussed below lists a medical-payments dollar. No medical-payments figure is put on the company chart.

Tort is not abolished. Basic economic loss benefits paid or payable, or which would be payable but for a deductible, are deducted from a negligence recovery. If the claimant is at fault under section 604.01, that deduction is made before damages are reduced for fault. § 65B.51, subd. 1. Economic loss that basic economic loss does not pay, because of a coverage gap, a daily or weekly dollar limit, the seven-day replacement-services exclusion, the section 65B.44 benefit cap, or an exclusion under sections 65B.58 to 65B.60, can still be sued. § 65B.51, subd. 2. The threshold in the next paragraphs does not block every lawsuit.

A separate $1,000,000 policy covers the driver, not the passenger

Since January 1, 2025, the company must maintain a blanket accident-and-sickness policy for the driver’s personal injury during period 2 and period 3, including the immediate drop-off. The floor is not less than $1,000,000 per incident. It pays loss not otherwise covered by the auto insurance in paragraphs (b) and (c). It is not an extra auto-liability limit. It is not workers’ compensation. Section 181C.07 says nothing in chapter 181C prohibits collective bargaining or shall be construed to determine whether a driver is an employee. Do not infer employment, or workers’ compensation, from the existence of paragraph (d).

The policy borrows no-fault categories and then changes them. Medical expense benefits have the meaning in section 65B.44, subdivision 2, except that payment for rehabilitative services is only required when the services are medically necessary. Disability, replacement services, and the two survivor benefits have the section 65B.44 meanings, subject to the weekly maximum amount, and each has a 130-week maximum measured from injury or from death. Funeral and burial expenses have the meaning in section 65B.44, subdivision 4, which itself caps reasonable expenses at $5,000. § 65B.472, subd. 1. The $20,000 medical cap and the $20,000 non-medical pool are in section 65B.44, subdivision 1, not in subdivision 2. Do not describe the driver policy as a second $20,000 of basic economic loss, and do not describe it as $1,000,000 of medical with no weekly cap and no funeral cap. The weekly maximums and the funeral definition are incorporated. The 130-week period is in the rideshare section, not in section 65B.44.

Paragraph (d) does not apply during period 1. A driver who is only waiting has not entered the statutory window. Do not apply paragraph (d), or the uninsured reduction in paragraph (h), to an accident before January 1, 2025. The auto dollars in the 2023 text were already 50/100/30 and $1,500,000.

What a given company prints about this product is not the same as the statutory floor, and the two companies do not print the same facts. The auto certificates do not state the $1,000,000 driver benefit. The occupational pages are separate documents. Insurer, policy number, and policy period for those occupational policies were not on the documents read. The statutory $1,000,000 is what section 65B.472 requires. It is not a purchased-limit figure taken from Uber’s auto certificate or from Uber’s occupational paragraph.

A personal policy may exclude every coverage, including no-fault benefits

Insurers that write automobile insurance in Minnesota may exclude any and all coverage afforded under the owner’s policy for any loss or injury that occurs during period 1, period 2, and period 3. The right may apply to any coverage in an automobile policy, including liability, uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage, basic economic loss benefits as defined in section 65B.44, medical payments, comprehensive, and collision. These exclusions apply notwithstanding any requirement under the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act. Nothing in the section implies or requires that a personal automobile policy provide coverage during period 1, period 2, or period 3, or while the driver otherwise uses a vehicle to transport passengers for compensation. An insurer may still cover the vehicle by contract or endorsement if it chooses. § 65B.472, subd. 4(a).

An insurer that excludes coverage has no duty to defend or indemnify any claim expressly excluded. The section does not invalidate an exclusion in a policy in use or approved for use in Minnesota prior to May 19, 2015 that excludes coverage for vehicles used to carry persons or property for a charge or available for hire by the public. § 65B.472, subd. 4(b). That grandfather preserves old exclusions. It does not create coverage. The May 19, 2015 date is the date stated in the current section.

If a personal insurer defends or indemnifies a claim that its policy excludes, it has a right of contribution against other insurers that provide automobile insurance to the same driver in satisfaction of subdivision 2 at the time of loss. § 65B.472, subd. 4(c).

If driver-maintained insurance under paragraph (b) or (c) has lapsed or does not provide the required coverage, company insurance shall provide the coverage required by the subdivision beginning with the first dollar of a claim and have the duty to defend. § 65B.472, subd. 2(i). “The coverage required by this subdivision” is the subdivision’s requirement. It is not a promise that every extra certificate limit above the statutory floor is owed, and it is not a rewrite of a certificate line that omits a period 3 liability dollar. It does apply when the driver’s policy does not provide the required coverage, not only when the policy is missing entirely. The section does not say that a driver policy which merely sits below the statutory limit makes the company policy excess for the difference. There is no excess-gap sentence of that kind.

Coverage under an automobile insurance policy maintained by the company shall not be dependent on a personal automobile insurer first denying a claim, nor shall a personal automobile insurance policy be required to first deny a claim. § 65B.472, subd. 2(j). That sentence is about the automobile policy. Paragraph (d)’s accident-and-sickness coverage is written as payment for loss not otherwise covered by the paragraph (b) and (c) insurance. That is a different structure. Do not describe paragraph (d) as first-dollar auto liability.

Logged-off personal use is outside periods 1, 2, and 3. The exclusion permission is for loss that occurs during those periods. The section does not say a personal insurer may deny an ordinary personal trip solely because the insured also drives for a transportation network company. The authorized exclusion is tied to periods 1, 2, and 3. While the driver is logged off, the mandatory floor is the section 65B.48 and section 65B.49 plan: 30/60/10, plus basic economic loss and the 25/50 uninsured and underinsured coverages. It is not the rideshare 50/100/30.

Liberty Surplus prints $1,500,000 after acceptance. The current Mobilitas form leaves period 3 liability blank.

The statutory floor is the same for both companies. The certificates are not the same document. Neither certificate prints a personal-injury-protection dollar, a medical-payments limit, an airport liability increase, or the $1,000,000 driver benefit. A combined single limit of $1,500,000 on a certificate is the company’s form. It is not a statutory label, and it is not uninsured coverage.

Uber

The file linked from the Minnesota entry on Uber’s U.S. certificates list is issued by Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation, NAIC 10725. The certificate date on each page is February 25, 2026. The producer is Aon Risk Insurance Services West, Inc., San Francisco. The insureds are Rasier LLC, Rasier-CA LLC, Rasier-DC LLC, and Rasier-PA LLC. The certificate face does not print the words “State of Minnesota.” The state identification is Uber’s own certificates index. The $30,000 property-damage limit, the $1,500,000 combined single limit, and the $25,000 / $50,000 uninsured and underinsured figures track sections 65B.472 and 65B.49 rather than Uber’s generic national description. Uber certificate linked from the Minnesota certificates entry. The index page is Uber’s driver insurance page.

• Available and waiting. Policy ASE-665-067247-496. Certificate number 570118117744. March 1, 2026 through March 1, 2027. Covered autos, as the description states, are passenger autos used by a driver logged into the digital network application, available to receive requests, who has not accepted any request. Limits printed: $50,000 bodily injury per person, $100,000 bodily injury per accident, $30,000 property damage. “Personal Injury Protection included as further described in the policy.” Uninsured and underinsured coverage included in the amount of $25,000 for death and bodily injury per person and $50,000 for death and bodily injury per accident.
• After acceptance, en route or on the trip. Policy ASE-665-067247-506. Certificate number 570118117745. Same dates. Covered autos: the driver has logged and recorded acceptance of a request and is en route to the pickup location or traveling from the pickup location to the final destination. Combined single limit printed: $1,500,000. The same personal-injury-protection sentence. The same $25,000 / $50,000 uninsured and underinsured sentence. That uninsured sentence is not limited to the passenger leg. It covers the en-route use described in the same paragraph.
• Physical damage on the same policy number ASE-665-067247-506. Certificate number 570118117746. Same dates, for the accepted-trip use described above. Collision deductible $2,500. Comprehensive deductible $2,500. The certificate description does not say this physical-damage coverage is contingent on the driver carrying personal comprehensive and collision.

“Personal Injury Protection included as further described in the policy” is not a statement that the limit is $20,000 medical and $20,000 other. Do not write that split as an Uber certificate limit. The statute requires basic economic loss benefits where section 65B.44 requires them. The policy, which this certificate is not, is what states the limit actually purchased. The certificate also does not prove that no personal-injury-protection obligation exists merely because the dollar is omitted.

Uber’s general insurance page, not the certificate, uses different national numbers. While online and available, it says at least $50,000 per person, $100,000 per accident, and $25,000 property damage. While en route or on a trip, it says at least $1,000,000. It also says repair coverage once a ride is accepted is up to actual cash value, with a $2,500 deductible, contingent on personal insurance including comprehensive and collision, and that there is no Uber-maintained collision or comprehensive coverage if the driver is offline, is online but has not accepted a trip, or does not maintain personal comprehensive and collision. Those sentences are on the same driver insurance page. They are not the Minnesota-linked certificate. The certificate prints $30,000 property damage and $1,500,000, and it does not print the contingency sentence. Do not merge the two documents into one Minnesota limit.

Uber’s occupational paragraph does not print $1,000,000

The same Uber page, under injury protection, states that in Minnesota, effective January 1, 2025, Uber maintains occupational accident insurance for rideshare drivers. It says the insurance is provided automatically for accidents that occur while the driver is on the way to pick up a passenger in Minnesota or on a rideshare trip originating in Minnesota. No sign-up is needed. Coverage includes medical expenses, disability payments, and survivor benefits. The paragraph does not print $1,000,000. It does not say the coverage applies while the driver is only waiting. It does not name an occupational insurer, a policy number, or a policy period beyond “effective January 1, 2025.” Those items, and the dollar limits of that policy as purchased rather than as required by statute, are not settled by these documents.

The claims path on that page is not the auto certificate. For Minnesota drivers, the page says a claim may be submitted by written notice of a loss within 90 days of the accident through the Intact specialty form, or by requesting a physical claim form at 844-747-4681. That is a claims instruction. It does not say Intact is the named insurer on a declarations page. The auto insurer on the certificate is Liberty Surplus. Intact is the claims portal on that page, not the auto insurer. An occupational claim is not the Liberty Surplus auto claim, and it is not proof of the $1,500,000 liability tier.

Optional injury protection, described on the same page as a product a driver may purchase in many places, is a different product. The Minnesota occupational paragraph says no sign-up is needed. Do not describe the statutory driver benefit as optional, and do not describe optional injury protection as the section 65B.472, subdivision 2(d) policy.

Lyft

Lyft’s current Minnesota certificate is issued by Mobilitas General Insurance Company, NAIC 10675. The certificate date is August 14, 2026. Certificate number SEA-004219066-07. Reference line CN109337515-MN-GAWUX-26-27. The producer is Marsh Risk & Insurance Services, San Francisco. The insured is Lyft, Inc., 185 Berry St., Suite 400, San Francisco. The form says “Evidence of Insurance Only for the State of MN.” Policies run October 1, 2026 through October 1, 2027. Lyft Minnesota certificate, August 14, 2026.

• Period 1. Policy MNBA1T6624548271. Bodily injury $50,000 per person and $100,000 per accident, property damage $30,000, and on that row uninsured and underinsured coverage of $25,000 / $50,000.
• Period 2. Policy MNBA2T6624548271. Combined single limit $1,500,000.
• Period 3. PolicyMNBA3T6624548271. The limits cell prints “APD Deductible: 2,500” and does not print a liability dollar. The current period 3 liability dollar is not settled by this form.

Remarks say the auto physical-damage limits are provided under the period 2 and period 3 policies and will be actual cash value or the cost of repair, whichever is less, less the $2,500 deductible. Policies for period 2 and period 3 include uninsured and underinsured coverage of $25,000 / $50,000. All policies evidenced include personal injury protection. That personal-injury-protection sentence does not print $20,000 / $20,000 or $40,000. Do not supply those dollars as Lyft’s certificate limit. The same caution applies in the other direction: omitting the dollar is not a statement that Lyft has no basic-economic-loss obligation under the statute.

The certificate does not define period 1, period 2, or period 3. Period 1’s printed 50/100/30 matches the period 1 statutory floor, and period 2 is the only row with a printed $1,500,000 liability limit. That comparison is an inference from the dollars. It is not a label the form prints. The current form does not state a period 3 liability dollar.

A prior certificate dated August 22, 2025, for policies October 1, 2025 through October 1, 2026, same policy numbers, same insurer and NAIC 10675, did print a period 3 combined single limit of $1,500,000, along with a period 2 combined single limit of $1,500,000. Lyft Minnesota certificate, August 22, 2025. That is last year’s form. It is not the current limit. It shows only that an earlier certificate for an earlier policy year printed that period 3 figure. A loss during that earlier policy year is decided by the policy then in force, not by the August 14, 2026 form, and a loss during the current policy year is not decided by the 2025 certificate.

A city help page folds uninsured coverage into $1.5 million. The certificate does not.

Lyft’s Minneapolis and St. Paul driver page is not the certificate. It says, for Lyft drivers in Minnesota, that from app-on until accept the primary liability is a $50,000 maximum per person, a $100,000 maximum per accident, and a $30,000 maximum for property damage, and that from accept until the driver drops off a passenger the primary liability is up to $1.5 million at a combined single limit, including bodily injury, property damage, and uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage. It also says Lyft provides personal injury protection from app-on until drop-off. Lyft, Minneapolis and St. Paul driver information. That page folds uninsured and underinsured coverage into the $1.5 million combined single limit. The current certificate does not. The certificate states uninsured and underinsured coverage at $25,000 / $50,000. Do not use the help-page sentence as the uninsured limit. The page is written as statewide coverage placed on a city page. It does not state a Minneapolis or St. Paul auto limit different from the state.

Lyft’s occupational page states a medical maximum and a 66 percent formula

Lyft’s occupational-accident help page is a different document from the auto certificate. It says occupational accident insurance provides medical expense and disability benefits for covered injuries while drivers are completing trips that originate in Minnesota on or after January 1, 2025. The medical expense benefit is up to a maximum benefit amount of $1,000,000, subject to the terms of the policy. Temporary total disability is equal to 66 percent of the driver’s average weekly earnings from all network companies, subject to the minimum and maximum limits and subject to the terms of the policy. Accidental death benefits and burial expenses are also subject to the policy. No sign-up. Drivers do not pay for it. Lyft, occupational accident insurance.

The page says approved Minnesota drivers would not be eligible if they were logged into the Lyft app but have not accepted a ride. A driver logged into Lyft who has accepted a ride request from another network company is not eligible for occupational accident insurance benefits under the policy procured by Lyft. The page distinguishes this product from auto liability: the auto policy covers third-party bodily injury and property damage and may not cover benefits available to the driver under occupational accident insurance, such as medical expenses and disability payments. The page does not name the insurer, a policy number, or an expiration date.

The 66 percent figure is Lyft’s description of its policy. It is not the statute. Section 65B.472 gives “disability and income loss benefits” the meaning in section 65B.44, subdivision 3, subject to the weekly maximum amount and with a maximum time period of 130 weeks after the injury. Section 65B.44, subdivision 3, is 85 percent of loss of present and future gross income, maximum $500 per week. Do not merge 66 percent and 85 percent into one benefit. What a given Lyft policy pays is the policy. What the statute requires the company to maintain is the list in section 65B.472, subdivision 2(d), inside “not less than $1,000,000 per incident.”

Recovery is barred only when the claimant’s fault is greater

Fault is modified comparative fault under section 604.01, subdivision 1. The claimant’s fault reduces damages in proportion. Recovery is barred only when the claimant’s fault is greater than the fault of the person against whom recovery is sought. Basic economic loss benefits are deducted before that reduction. § 65B.51, subd. 1. This is a damages rule. It does not change the $1,500,000 liability floor, and it does not turn uninsured coverage into that floor.

Noneconomic damages still need the $4,000 threshold or a listed serious outcome

In an action described in section 65B.51, subdivision 1, no person shall recover damages for noneconomic detriment unless the sum described in the statute exceeds $4,000, or the injury results in permanent disfigurement, permanent injury, death, or disability for 60 days or more. The $4,000 sum is reasonable medical expense benefits paid, payable, or payable but for a deductible, plus the value of free care by a relative or household member, plus a shortfall against the average reasonable charge if the person was charged less, minus amounts for diagnostic x-rays and for rehabilitative rather than remedial treatment. Disability means “the inability to engage in substantially all of the injured person’s usual and customary daily activities.” § 65B.51, subd. 3. “Noneconomic detriment” includes pain and suffering, loss of consortium, and inconvenience. § 65B.43, subd. 8.

The threshold does not apply to a defect claim against a person in the business of manufacturing, repairing, or maintaining vehicles, or to negligence other than in the operation, ownership, maintenance, or use of a motor vehicle. § 65B.51, subds. 4 and 5. Unpaid economic loss can still be claimed even when noneconomic damages are barred. § 65B.51, subd. 2.

A negligence action for injury to the person, not arising on contract, is six years. § 541.05, subd. 1(5). Unless the no-fault chapter says otherwise, a plan of reparation security must conform to the six-year limitation in section 541.05, subdivision 1(1), the contract clause. § 65B.49, subd. 10(a). A cause of action relating to underinsured motorist coverage under section 65B.49, subdivision 3a, is four years from accrual. § 65B.49, subd. 10(b). Those are different clocks. None of them is a coverage trigger.

City rules, and the airport’s licensee general-liability policy

Local governments may not enact or enforce an ordinance that regulates a matter relating to transportation network companies or their drivers addressed in section 65B.472 or chapter 181C. § 181C.10. That preemption was effective the day after the governor signed Laws 2024, chapter 127. The act was signed May 24, 2024, so the effective date is May 25, 2024. Check with a Minnesota attorney before relying on a Minneapolis or St. Paul auto-liability limit different from section 65B.472.

Metropolitan Airports Commission Ordinance No. 124, adopted October 17, 2016, and effective January 1, 2017, requires the licensee and drivers to comply with insurance “mandated by federal, state of Minnesota, workers compensation requirements, and local laws,” including no-fault basic economic loss “to the extent required by Minnesota law,” and it requires documentation of compliance with section 65B.472. Nothing in that insurance section modifies or abrogates section 65B.49. Separately, section 5.1.H requires the licensee to keep commercial general liability of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 aggregate. Section 5.1.I requires workers’ compensation evidence if the licensee has employees. MAC Ordinance No. 124. That commercial general liability figure is not a different trip-liability tier, and it does not raise uninsured coverage at the airport. The ordinance does not set a 50/100/30 or $1,500,000 substitute.

Whether section 181C.10 voids the ordinance’s commercial general liability condition is not settled. The condition does not set a different auto-liability limit for an accident at the airport. Section 181C.09 lets a local unit refuse or revoke a license for failure to comply with chapter 181C. That is a licensing remedy for the labor chapter. It is not a city insurance schedule.

The ordinance’s claims-cooperation sentence asks the licensee, in a claims investigation, to cooperate with a liability insurer that also insures the endorsed vehicle, including relevant dates and times during which an incident occurred while the driver was active on the digital network. “Active” in that ordinance includes logged on and available, a passenger in the vehicle, and en route after acceptance. That is an airport-permit sentence. It does not replace the 12-hour statute below.