Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
Contrary to the appellants' contention, the underinsured motorist benefits' provision of the petitioner's policy was triggered when the petitioner's insured exhausted, through a settlement, the bodily injury policy limits under the policy of the offending vehicle, which was less than the liability coverage provided under the petitioner's policy ( see Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [2]; S'Dao v. National Grange Mut. Ins. Co., 87 NY2d 853). The petitioner's insured was not also required to exhaust the liability coverage limits under a separate policy for the operator of the offending vehicle prior to pursuing a claim for underinsured motorist benefits ( see S'Dao v. National Grange Mut. Ins. Co., supra; Matter of Polesky v. GEICO Ins. Co., 241 AD2d 551, 552). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition to permanently stay arbitration of the subject underinsured motorist benefits claim and dismissed the proceeding.
The appellants' remaining contention is without merit.