A Circuit Court in Fairfax held that because the owner of the company that allowed an employee to take a company vehicle home did not advise the employee that he would be fired if he used the vehicle for personal use, but only responsible for any damages, the employee had implied consent to use the vehicle for personal use.

Virginia Court Finds Implied Consent for Employee to Use Company Vehicle for Personal Use

A Virginia court has interpreted the terms of a commercial auto policy to afford coverage to a driver involved in an accident with an off-duty employee of the company who was using the vehicle for personal business without express permission.

The company owner testified that the driver was given the van to use for work purposes and that if he desired to use the van for a personal use, he was to ask permission. Further, if the driver failed to ask permission, he was told he was responsible for anything that happened while he was driving the van.

The court finds that this instruction gives the driver implied consent to use the van for personal purposes. The owner instructed the driver that failure to ask for permission prior to a personal use of the van would make the driver responsible for any accidents that might occur. However, the owner did not instruct the driver that he would fire him if he drove the van without permission, but simply told the driver that if he drove the van without first seeking permission, the driver would be held responsible if anything were to happen. Therefore, the court finds there was no specific prohibition against operating the vehicle and thus, there was implied consent to the driver’s use of the vehicle.



Mr. Stelly regularly appears in the courts of the City of Richmond, Henrico County, Chesterfield County, Goochland County, and Hanover County.

Bookmark and Share