California codified the Period 0/1/2/3 framework first under AB 2293 (2014) and Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.24 — and Prop 22 (2020) closed off the AB 5 employee-misclassification angle for most cases.
California is the most regulated and most litigated TNC market in the country. The four-period insurance tier framework was codified by AB 2293 in 2014 (Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.24), and the CPUC publishes annual TNC reports with crash data that are sometimes discoverable in litigation. Prop 22 (2020) reclassified TNC drivers as independent contractors and closed the AB 5 / Dynamex employee angle for most rideshare cases — but the $1M Period 2/3 commercial coverage remains the primary recovery source.
California's TNC framework is set out in Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 5430 et seq. and was originally established by the California Public Utilities Commission's 2013 TNC decision — the first state in the country to formally regulate Uber and Lyft. AB 2293, enacted in 2014, codified the four-period insurance tier framework in Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.24. Period 0 (app off): driver's personal auto policy applies. Period 1 (app on, awaiting match): TNC must provide $50,000 per person / $100,000 per accident bodily injury and $30,000 property damage primary coverage. Periods 2 and 3 (en route to pickup or with passenger): TNC must provide $1,000,000 combined single limit primary commercial coverage plus $1,000,000 in uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage.
California applies pure comparative fault under Li v. Yellow Cab Co., 13 Cal.3d 804 (1975), and the personal injury statute of limitations is two years under Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1. The two-year clock runs from the date of the crash. If the crash involved a city, county, transit agency (BART, LA Metro, MUNI, OCTA), or public university vehicle, the California Government Claims Act under Cal. Gov. Code § 911.2 imposes a six-month claim presentation deadline — and missing it bars the case against that defendant entirely.
The independent contractor classification of TNC drivers is a contested area in California. The California Supreme Court in Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018) adopted the ABC test for worker classification, and AB 5 (2019) codified Dynamex into statute. AB 5 would have classified most Uber and Lyft drivers as employees, exposing the TNCs to vicarious liability. Proposition 22 (2020), codified at Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7448 et seq., exempted TNC and delivery drivers from AB 5 and reclassified them as independent contractors with limited statutory benefits. The California Supreme Court upheld Prop 22 in Castellanos v. State of California (2024). The practical effect: most California rideshare injury cases now run through the TNC's $1M commercial policy, not through direct vicarious liability claims against Uber or Lyft.
Port of LA / Long Beach airport pickup zones, downtown San Francisco, the Sunset Strip, and the LAX Loop generate disproportionate California rideshare crash volume. The CPUC's annual TNC reports publish aggregate crash and incident data that a local attorney can subpoena and use as comparative context. Trip data screenshots from the rider's app remain the single most important early evidence in any California rideshare case — they establish which insurance period applied and which policy responds.
Legal Information Notice
The legal information on this page is for general educational purposes only and is not legal advice. Laws change, and every case is different. Always consult with a licensed attorney in your state to verify the current law and how it applies to your specific situation.
Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.24 codifies the four-period framework. Period 0 (app off) — the driver's personal auto policy applies. Period 1 (app on, no match) — the TNC must provide $50,000 per person / $100,000 per accident bodily injury and $30,000 property damage primary coverage. Periods 2 and 3 (en route to pickup or passenger aboard) — the TNC must provide $1,000,000 combined single limit primary commercial coverage AND $1,000,000 in uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage. Establishing which period the driver was in at the moment of the crash determines the entire recovery analysis.
Indirectly. Prop 22 (2020), codified at Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7448 et seq., exempted TNC and delivery drivers from AB 5 and the Dynamex ABC test, classifying them as independent contractors. The California Supreme Court upheld Prop 22 in Castellanos v. State of California (2024). For injury plaintiffs, the practical effect is that direct vicarious liability claims against Uber or Lyft as corporate employers are largely closed off. The recovery path now runs through the TNC's $1,000,000 Period 2/3 commercial insurance policy, which responds to the driver's negligence. Direct claims for negligent hiring, retention, or background-check failures are sometimes possible but usually denied at the pleading stage.
The driver is the primary defendant. Uber and Lyft are protected from direct vicarious liability in most California cases because TNC drivers are statutorily classified as independent contractors under Prop 22 (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7448 et seq.). The practical recovery source is the TNC's $1,000,000 commercial insurance policy under Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.24, which responds to the driver's negligence during Periods 2 and 3. Direct corporate negligence claims against Uber or Lyft are sometimes possible but rarely survive a pleading-stage challenge in California.
Top priority: screenshots from the Uber or Lyft app — the trip receipt, timestamp, in-app GPS route, driver profile, and any messages. These establish which TNC insurance period applied. Also: the police report (CHP or local PD), dashcam footage, witness contact information, photographs from the scene, and the driver's name and TNC permit number. Send a corporate preservation letter to Uber Technologies, Inc. or Lyft, Inc. within days, requesting trip data, internal incident reports, and driver safety records. The CPUC's annual TNC crash reports may also be discoverable and can provide comparative context.
All legal information on this page is sourced from primary government statutes. Last verified 2026-04-07.
Cal. Pub. Util. Code § 5430
California TNC Statutory Framework
Cal. Ins. Code § 11580.24
TNC Insurance Tier Requirements (Period 0/1/2/3)
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 7448
TNC Driver Independent Contractor Status
Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal.5th 903 (2018)
ABC Test for Worker Classification
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 335.1
2-Year Statute of Limitations (Personal Injury)
In-depth articles relevant to your rideshare accident lawyer case.
Uber or Lyft Accident: What to Do and Who Pays
Injured in an Uber or Lyft accident? Learn who is liable, what insurance covers your claim, and steps to protect your rights.
How to Deal With Insurance Companies After an Accident (2026 Guide)
Learn how to deal with insurance adjusters after an accident. Avoid common traps, protect your claim, and maximize your settlement.
How Long Does a Personal Injury Case Take? (2026 Timeline)
Understand the typical timeline of a personal injury case from filing to settlement. Learn what factors speed up or delay your claim.
Different type of accident? We connect victims with attorneys across all six practice areas.
Collected by partner attorneys for injured clients. California and Pennsylvania reviews prioritized.
“After my crash, I did not know whether to talk to the insurance company first or get treatment documented. The attorney explained the timeline and what evidence mattered.”
— California accident review, Los Angeles, CA
“I did not understand Pennsylvania limited tort or why the adjuster kept asking about my policy. Getting matched with someone local helped me know what questions to ask.”
— Pennsylvania accident review, Philadelphia, PA
Informational only. GetAccidentLawyerNow is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. Every case is unique.
Don't wait. The 2 years statute of limitations is ticking.
Call (267) 212-1034 Now*Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every case is unique.