Re: Hurt While Working on Company Vehicle, Off the Clock
You can file but your chances of prevailing are just about zero, especially in Texas.
can I file a claim because I was working on/ in a company vehicle while at home even though I was off the clock?
Based on your post, the circumstances don't meet the definition of "Course and scope of employment" which is required to qualify for benefits.
You can consult a lawyer and see if he'll take the case but don't hold your breath.
Course and Scope of Employment
For an injury to be compensable, it must have occurred while the IW was in the course and scope of employment. Course and scope of employment is defined as an activity of any kind or character that has to do with and originates in the work, business, trade, or profession of the employer and that is performed by an employee while engaged in or about the furtherance of the affairs or business of the employer. Section 401.011(12).
Section 401.011(12) specifically excludes certain activities from the definition of "course and scope of employment." The excluded activities are as follows:
Section 401.011(12)(A) is commonly referred to as the coming and going rule. Section 401.011(12)(A)(i), (ii), and (iii) are exceptions to the coming and going rule, with Section 401.011(12)(A)(iii) being commonly referred to as the special mission exception. Section 401.011(12)(A) provides that an injury which occurs during transportation to and from the place of employment is not compensable unless:
(i) the transportation is furnished as a part of the contract of employment or is paid for by the employer;
(ii) the means of transportation are under the control of the employer; or
(iii) the IW is directed in the IW's employment to proceed from one place to another place.
Not In Course and Scope.
The IW was in a MVA on the way to work. The IW's transportation to work was provided by the employer as a favor to the IW. At the time of the accident the IW was not doing any work to further the business affairs of the employer. The IW's injuries were not compensable because the employer's affairs were not being furthered at the time of the MVA, and the transportation was furnished to the IW as a favor to him. Whether the IW was in the furtherance of the employer's business at the time of injury was a question of fact for the HO to resolve. APD 970666.
The IW has the burden of proof to establish that the injury was sustained while in the course and scope of employment. APD 041487. Whether the IW was in the course and scope of his or her employment at the time the claimed injury occurred is a question of fact for the HO to resolve. APD 030780.
Moderator Responses are based on my personal bias, experience and research - They do not represent the views of the admin nor may be accepted in the legal community, always consult an attorney.