How to Recover More Than the At-Fault Driver’s Insurance Policy Limits

When a serious accident leaves you with six-figure medical bills and a wrecked vehicle, the at-fault driver’s insurance policy may not come close to covering your losses. Georgia and South Carolina both require only $25,000 per person in bodily injury liability coverage — a number that barely scratches the surface of a traumatic brain injury, a spinal cord injury, or a wrongful death claim. The good news: the at-fault driver’s liability policy is not the ceiling on your recovery. Several legal strategies can push compensation well beyond those limits.

This guide walks through six options for recovering more than the at-fault driver’s policy limits, with specific statute references and practical differences between Georgia and South Carolina law. If you are dealing with a serious injury claim where policy limits are clearly insufficient, contact a car accident lawyer as early as possible — timing matters for several of these strategies.

For how many drivers carry no insurance at all, the Insurance Information Institute’s uninsured motorist data page lists uninsured-motorist rates by state.

Understanding Insurance Policy Limits in Georgia and South Carolina

Both Georgia and South Carolina require drivers to carry minimum liability insurance. The minimum amounts are identical on paper, but the way each state handles coverage gaps, stacking rules, and enforcement differs substantially.

These minimums — often written as 25/50/25 — were set more than 15 years ago and have not kept pace with modern medical costs. A motorcycle accident that causes a catastrophic spinal cord injury can generate lifetime care costs exceeding $2 million, according to the National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center. When the at-fault driver carries only minimum coverage, the injured person must look beyond that single policy to recover fair compensation.

Option 1 — Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist (UM/UIM) Coverage

Your own auto insurance policy is often the most immediate source of additional compensation. Uninsured motorist (UM) coverage applies when the at-fault driver has no insurance at all. Underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage kicks in when the at-fault driver’s policy is insufficient to cover your damages. Both states treat these coverages differently.

Georgia UM/UIM Rules

Under O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11, Georgia insurers must offer UM/UIM coverage equal to the liability limits on every auto policy they issue. The policyholder can reject the coverage or select lower limits, but the rejection must be in writing. Without a written rejection, UM/UIM coverage is part of the policy (§ 33-7-11(a)(3)) at the limits the policyholder elected, up to the liability limits. A second election matters as much: “added-on” coverage, the default, pays on top of the at-fault driver’s limits, while “reduced-by” coverage pays only the difference.

Georgia lets an injured person stack UM/UIM coverage from separate policies under which they are insured (State Farm v. Hancock, 1982), but not the coverage on several vehicles under a single policy (Crafter v. State Farm, 2001). If you are an insured under three separate policies that each carry $100,000 in UM/UIM coverage, you could potentially access $300,000 in underinsured motorist benefits.

South Carolina UM/UIM Rules

South Carolina takes an even more protective approach. Under S.C. Code § 38-77-150, uninsured motorist coverage is mandatory in South Carolina — every policy must carry it at no less than the 25/50/25 minimums, and it cannot be rejected. Underinsured motorist coverage is optional, but the insurer must offer it up to your liability limits (S.C. Code § 38-77-160) on a form approved by the Department of Insurance (§ 38-77-350). If the insurer cannot prove a meaningful offer, the policy is reformed to include UIM up to the liability limits (State Farm v. Wannamaker, 1987), and a form not returned within 30 days adds UM and UIM at the liability limits (§ 38-77-350(E)).

South Carolina lets a named insured or resident relative (a Class I insured) stack UM/UIM from other household vehicles and policies, but only up to the coverage on the vehicle involved in the crash (§ 38-77-160; Carter v. Standard Fire, 2013). This matters most for victims of pedestrian accidents and bicycle accidents, where the injured person is especially vulnerable to catastrophic harm and the at-fault driver often carries bare-minimum coverage.

Option 2 — Claims Against Multiple At-Fault Parties

Many serious accidents involve more than one negligent party. When multiple defendants share fault, each defendant’s insurance policy becomes a potential source of recovery — and the legal rules governing shared liability differ between Georgia and South Carolina.

Georgia: Several Liability Only — Each Defendant Pays Its Share

Georgia abolished joint liability for apportioned damages under O.C.G.A. § 51-12-33(b). Under Georgia’s comparative fault system, a plaintiff can recover only if the plaintiff is less than 50% at fault. Among defendants, Georgia applies several liability — each defendant pays only their proportional share of fault.

As a practical matter, identifying multiple at-fault parties in Georgia is critical because each defendant’s share of fault is capped at their percentage of responsibility. If two drivers share fault for a wreck that caused your traumatic brain injury, you pursue separate claims against each driver’s policy.

South Carolina: Modified Joint and Several Liability

South Carolina keeps joint and several liability only for a defendant whose share is 50% or more of the total fault, or whose conduct was wilful, wanton, reckless, intentional or drug-related (S.C. Code § 15-38-15). A defendant below 50% pays only its percentage. Under South Carolina’s comparative fault rule, a plaintiff can recover if the plaintiff is less than 51% at fault.

This difference matters when the deep-pocket defendant carries most of the fault: in South Carolina a defendant found 50% or more responsible can be made to pay the whole judgment, while in Georgia every defendant pays only its own share.

Option 3 — Umbrella or Excess Policies

Many drivers and businesses carry umbrella or excess liability policies that sit on top of their primary auto insurance. An umbrella policy typically provides $1 million to $5 million in additional coverage, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, and it activates once the underlying policy limits are exhausted.

Umbrella policies do not appear on a declarations page, but both states let your attorney compel disclosure before suit. In Georgia, a sworn written request under O.C.G.A. § 33-3-28 obliges every liability insurer — umbrella and excess carriers included — to disclose its policies and limits within 60 days. In South Carolina, S.C. Code § 38-77-250 requires auto insurers to answer a sworn request from the claimant’s attorney within 30 days, but only for private-passenger auto policies; umbrella and commercial coverage is found through discovery.

Umbrella policies are particularly common with commercial drivers and business owners. If the at-fault driver was operating a company vehicle or was on the job at the time of the crash, the employer’s commercial umbrella policy may provide millions in additional coverage. This is one reason why accidents involving commercial vehicles, including truck accidents, often result in substantially higher recoveries than crashes involving only private passenger vehicles.

Option 4 — Claims Against Employers or Commercial Entities

When the at-fault driver was working at the time of the accident, the employer may be vicariously liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior — Latin for “let the master answer.” Both Georgia and South Carolina recognize this doctrine, which holds employers responsible for the negligent acts of employees committed within the scope of employment.

This is the primary reason that trucking accident claims frequently result in recoveries far exceeding the individual driver’s policy limits. A solo driver might carry $25,000 in personal coverage, but the trucking company is required by federal law to carry at least $750,000 in liability coverage (49 C.F.R. § 387.9), rising to $1 million or $5 million for hazardous cargo. Commercial motor carriers, delivery companies, rideshare platforms, and construction companies all carry commercial policies that dwarf individual coverage limits.

Beyond respondeat superior, employers can face direct liability for negligent hiring, negligent training, negligent supervision, or negligent entrustment of a vehicle to an unqualified driver. These claims are independent of the employee’s own liability and open up additional coverage pools.

In product-related crashes — defective tires, faulty brakes, airbag failures — the vehicle or component manufacturer may also be liable. Product liability claims against manufacturers and distributors are paid from corporate policies that dwarf a personal auto policy.

Option 5 — Personal Assets of the At-Fault Driver

Insurance is only one source of recovery; the at-fault driver’s personal assets can be another. If the at-fault driver has personal assets — real estate, investment accounts, business interests — those assets can be reached through a judgment. In practice, pursuing personal assets makes financial sense only when the defendant has substantial wealth, because collection efforts against someone with few assets produce little return relative to the cost of litigation.

Georgia and South Carolina both have homestead exemptions that protect a portion of the defendant’s home equity from judgment creditors. In Georgia, the homestead exemption is $21,500 of equity (O.C.G.A. § 44-13-1). South Carolina’s exemption is $50,000 in the statute, indexed to inflation every two years (S.C. Code § 15-41-30), so the current figure is higher. These exemptions protect the defendant’s primary residence up to the stated amount, but any equity above the exemption is fair game. One caveat: an ordinary negligence judgment can be discharged in bankruptcy, but not one for injury caused by an intoxicated driver (11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(9)).

A lawyer pursuing a claim beyond policy limits will typically conduct an asset investigation early in the case. If the defendant has attachable assets, this changes the settlement dynamics — the defendant has personal skin in the game and is more motivated to settle rather than risk a judgment that could wipe out their savings or force a property sale. Cases involving wrongful death or permanent disability often justify the additional effort and expense of pursuing personal assets because the damages are so substantial.

Option 6 — Bad Faith Claims Against the Insurer

When an insurance company unreasonably refuses to settle a claim within policy limits, it may be liable for bad faith — and bad faith damages can far exceed the original policy limits. This is one of the most powerful tools for recovering beyond policy limits, but the rules differ significantly between Georgia and South Carolina. The failure-to-settle claim belongs to the at-fault driver, not to you; in practice the driver assigns it to the injured person in exchange for a promise not to collect the excess from them personally.

Georgia Bad Faith

Georgia recognizes a common-law bad faith cause of action against the at-fault driver’s own insurer (Southern General Ins. Co. v. Holt, 1992). When a liability insurer fails to settle within policy limits despite having a clear opportunity to do so, and the insured is subsequently hit with an excess judgment, the insurer may be liable for the full amount of the judgment — even the portion exceeding policy limits. In Holt itself, the at-fault driver assigned that claim to the injured person. This creates enormous leverage in negotiations.

Georgia’s statutory bad-faith penalty, O.C.G.A. § 33-4-6, protects policyholders against their own insurer: if your carrier refuses to pay a covered claim within 60 days of your demand and the refusal is in bad faith, it owes up to 50% of the loss or $5,000, whichever is greater, plus attorney’s fees. On a UM/UIM claim the penalty is under O.C.G.A. § 33-7-11(j): up to 25% of the recovery or $25,000, whichever is greater, plus fees. Neither statute reaches the other driver’s liability carrier; the third-party statute, § 33-4-7, covers property damage only (Mills v. Allstate, 2007).

South Carolina Bad Faith

South Carolina’s Department of Insurance polices claim handling — including third-party liability claims — under S.C. Code § 38-59-20, but that statute gives an injured claimant no right to sue the other driver’s insurer (Kleckley v. Northwestern National Casualty, 2000). Against your own insurer, South Carolina awards attorney’s fees when a claim is refused for 90 days after demand without reasonable cause (S.C. Code § 38-59-40) and recognizes a common-law bad-faith claim for actual, consequential, and punitive damages (Nichols v. State Farm, 1983), with punitive damages capped by S.C. Code § 15-32-530.

Under the Tyger River doctrine (Tyger River Pine Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 1933), a liability insurer that unreasonably rejects a within-limits settlement demand is liable to its insured for the entire excess judgment. Punitive damages in South Carolina bad faith cases can be substantial, depending on the egregiousness of the insurer’s conduct.

Georgia vs. South Carolina Comparison Table

The table below summarizes the key differences between the two states on issues that directly affect your ability to recover beyond the at-fault driver’s policy limits.

How a Lawyer Maximizes Recovery Beyond Policy Limits

Recovering beyond policy limits requires a fundamentally different approach than a standard insurance claim. An experienced personal injury attorney adds value at every stage of this process.

Early coverage investigation. Before filing suit, your attorney sends preservation letters and coverage disclosure requests to identify every available policy — the at-fault driver’s liability coverage, any umbrella or excess policies, employer or commercial policies, and your own UM/UIM coverage. The statutory disclosure requests (O.C.G.A. § 33-3-28; S.C. Code § 38-77-250) make this process faster, but in both states, a thorough investigation often uncovers coverage the injured person never knew existed.

Identifying all liable parties. Your attorney examines the facts to determine whether anyone besides the at-fault driver bears responsibility. Was the driver working? Was a vehicle defective? Was a road hazard caused by a government entity’s negligence? Did a bar or restaurant serve a noticeably intoxicated driver? Georgia’s Dram Shop Act (O.C.G.A. § 51-1-40) and South Carolina’s alcohol-licensing statutes can support a claim. Each additional defendant opens a new insurance policy and increases the total available recovery.

Strategic demand sequencing. When multiple coverage sources exist, the order in which demands are made and settlements are negotiated can significantly affect the total recovery. For example, settling with the at-fault driver’s insurer for the full policy limits before pursuing UIM coverage preserves the full UIM claim. Settling in the wrong order can create offsets or credits that reduce the overall recovery.

Bad faith positioning. When a liability insurer is dragging its feet, your attorney can structure a time-limited policy-limits demand that creates bad faith exposure for the insurer. If the insurer fails to accept the demand within the specified timeframe, it risks excess liability — and insurers know this. In Georgia that demand must follow O.C.G.A. § 9-11-67.1 — at least 30 days to accept — and an unreasonably short deadline does not create bad-faith exposure (Holt). The threat of bad faith exposure is often enough to push a reluctant insurer to tender its full policy limits.

Litigation readiness. Insurance companies pay more when they believe the plaintiff is genuinely prepared to go to trial. Filing suit, conducting aggressive discovery, retaining strong expert witnesses, and preparing for trial all signal that the plaintiff will not accept a lowball offer. This is especially true in cases involving catastrophic injuries — traumatic brain injuries, spinal cord injuries, and wrongful death claims — where the potential verdict at trial could be many multiples of the available policy limits.

Contact Roden Law — We Fight for Full Compensation

If your damages exceed the at-fault driver’s insurance policy limits, you need a law firm that knows how to find every dollar of available coverage and build a case that maximizes your total recovery. Roden Law has recovered more than $300 million for injured clients across Georgia and South Carolina, and we have extensive experience handling claims that push well beyond policy limits — including cases involving commercial truck accidents, motorcycle accidents, and other catastrophic injury claims.

We work on a contingency fee basis, which means you pay nothing unless we win. Call 1-844-RESULTS or contact any of our six offices in Savannah, Darien, Charleston, North Charleston, Columbia, or Myrtle Beach for a free case evaluation. The statute of limitations in Georgia is just two years under O.C.G.A. § 9-3-33, and three years in South Carolina under S.C. Code § 15-3-530 — do not wait until time runs out to explore your options.

About the Author

Graeham C. Gillin

Partner, COO