Kentucky's TNC statute at KRS 281.655 requires rideshare vehicles to carry $100,000 per person / $300,000 per accident / $50,000 property damage — significantly higher than many states' minimums. Pure comparative fault under KRS 411.182 means no fault percentage bars recovery, but Kentucky's choice no-fault system creates PIP questions that don't apply to motorcycle riders but do apply to rideshare passengers.
Kentucky's rideshare market is anchored in Louisville and Lexington, with significant demand from the bourbon trail tourism corridor and the University of Kentucky and University of Louisville campus areas. Kentucky's TNC legislation was enacted by SB 153 (2015 Ky. Acts ch. 19) and requires rideshare vehicles to carry liability coverage substantially above many states' minimums — $100,000 per person, $300,000 per accident, $50,000 property damage under KRS 281.655 for vehicles with seven or fewer seats. Kentucky is a choice no-fault state under KRS 304.39-060: drivers who did not reject no-fault coverage in writing carry PIP (basic reparation benefits) that covers their own medical expenses first. Whether PIP applies to a rideshare passenger depends on how the passenger's own auto policy was structured. Pure comparative fault under KRS 411.182 means no fault percentage bars recovery, but every percentage point the TNC insurer attributes to the injured passenger or third party reduces the net check dollar-for-dollar.
Kentucky's motor vehicle accident statute of limitations is two years from the date of the crash under KRS 304.39-230(6), which governs rideshare motor vehicle claims. This is longer than the general one-year personal injury statute under KRS 413.140(1)(a), which applies to non-motor-vehicle injuries. Many injured passengers and bystanders incorrectly believe the one-year deadline applies. The two-year window does not extend the evidence preservation deadline. TNC platforms retain digital trip data — GPS coordinates, ride-status logs, driver acceptance timestamps — on proprietary schedules that are not governed by federal vehicle data retention rules. A preservation demand to the TNC's legal department must go to the specific trip ID and driver account within days of the crash, before routine data purging protocols apply. Kentucky's Board of Claims one-year filing deadline under KRS 49.120 applies if a road defect maintained by the Commonwealth contributed to the crash — that deadline runs inside the two-year motor vehicle SOL.
Kentucky's higher-than-average TNC insurance minimums under KRS 281.655 — $100,000 per person, $300,000 per accident, $50,000 property damage — provide meaningful coverage for serious rideshare injuries. But the structure of period-based coverage still creates the same critical question as in every state: which period was active at the moment of impact? KRS 281.655 does not expressly distinguish coverage tiers in the same three-period structure used by Alabama's and Louisiana's TNC statutes, but the practical period classification — logged in vs. ride accepted vs. passenger in vehicle — governs which insurance applies. Kentucky's choice no-fault system under KRS 304.39-060 creates an additional question for rideshare passengers: if the passenger carries PIP coverage on their own auto policy, PIP pays medical expenses first before the tort claim proceeds. Passengers who rejected no-fault coverage in writing retain full tort rights without a PIP threshold. The two-year motor vehicle SOL under KRS 304.39-230(6) applies regardless of PIP status.
Kentucky's pure comparative fault rule under KRS 411.182 means no fault percentage bars recovery in a rideshare accident. A passenger or bystander found 80% at fault still recovers 20% of damages — but that 20% reflects 80% reduction from the full damage picture. In Louisville and Lexington rideshare crashes, the standard TNC insurer fault arguments target passenger conduct: directing the driver to an unsafe drop-off location, opening a door into traffic, or exiting the vehicle in an unsafe location. For third-party drivers injured in collisions with rideshare vehicles, fault arguments follow standard patterns: following too closely, lane change negligence, or failure to yield. Kentucky courts apply comparative fault strictly — the jury's allocation directly determines the recovery amount. A local Kentucky rideshare attorney who secures the TNC's GPS logs, dashcam footage (where available), and independent witness statements before the insurer's team reaches them establishes the objective fault record that limits the TNC's fault-inflation arguments.
Kentucky's Board of Claims at KRS 49.120 provides the channel for claims against the Commonwealth when a state-maintained road defect contributed to a rideshare crash. The Board imposes a one-year filing deadline and caps recovery at $250,000 per claimant / $400,000 per incident under KRS 49.040. For rideshare crashes on Lexington's legacy road network, Louisville's downtown one-way grid, or the secondary road network near the bourbon trail, government-entity claims may supplement the primary TNC recovery. Kentucky's pure comparative fault rule applies to the government entity's share of fault just as it does to private defendants — the Board allocates the Commonwealth's proportionate fault and caps total recovery at the statutory ceiling. The one-year Board of Claims deadline runs inside the two-year motor vehicle SOL, making early identification of any government road condition a critical first-week task.
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.
Kentucky's TNC statute at KRS 281.655 requires rideshare vehicles with seven or fewer seats to carry $100,000 per person, $300,000 per accident, and $50,000 property damage in automobile liability insurance. This is significantly higher than many states' TNC minimums. The two-year motor vehicle statute of limitations under KRS 304.39-230(6) applies to rideshare accident claims. Kentucky's pure comparative fault rule (KRS 411.182) means no fault percentage bars recovery — every percentage point of fault reduces the net recovery proportionally.
Kentucky is a choice no-fault state under KRS 304.39-060. Drivers who did not reject no-fault coverage in writing carry PIP (basic reparation benefits) that covers their own medical expenses first, regardless of fault. A rideshare passenger who carries a Kentucky auto policy with PIP may have PIP apply to their medical expenses before the tort claim proceeds. Passengers who rejected no-fault in writing retain full tort rights without a threshold. Motorcycles are exempt from PIP requirements entirely under KRS 304.39-110(3). A local attorney should evaluate the passenger's own auto policy structure early to determine whether PIP applies and how it interacts with the rideshare recovery.
Two years from the date of the crash under KRS 304.39-230(6), which governs motor vehicle accident tort claims including rideshare accidents. This is longer than Kentucky's general personal injury statute of limitations of one year under KRS 413.140(1)(a). If a government road defect contributed, a Board of Claims petition must be filed within one year under KRS 49.120 — running inside the two-year motor vehicle deadline.
Under KRS 411.182, no fault percentage bars recovery — a passenger or bystander found 70% at fault still recovers 30% of damages. But every fault percentage reduces the net check. TNC insurers use standard fault arguments: unsafe passenger conduct, improper door-opening, or aggressive exit behavior. The TNC's GPS and ride-status logs, dashcam footage, and independent witness statements are the objective record that establishes what actually happened and limits fault-inflation arguments.
Kentucky's TNC statute (KRS 281.010(69)-(73)) defines TNC drivers as receiving connections from the platform "in exchange for payment of a fee" — the statute does not establish an employer-employee relationship, effectively treating drivers as independent contractors. The TNC's liability is primarily tied to the insurance requirement under KRS 281.655. Direct TNC negligence claims — allowing high-risk drivers to continue operating after complaints, inadequate safety vetting — may be asserted separately from the insurance coverage question. The driver remains individually liable for negligent operation regardless of TNC classification.
All legal information on this page is sourced from primary government statutes. Last verified 2026-04-07.
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.