Although plaintiff was injured in a vehicular collision while she was a permissive passenger in a vehicle owned by another individual, plaintiff was not an “insured” under the umbrella policy issued by defendant to the owner of the car and the owner’s husband, and plaintiff was not entitled to underinsured motorist coverage under the umbrella policy, since umbrella policies and primary automobile policies are distinct and an umbrella policy is outside the scope of the laws applicable to underinsured motorist coverage; therefore, plaintiff’s action seeking a declaration that underinsured motorist coverage existed under the umbrella policy was properly dismissed.