Can the insurance company refuse to pay for a private car that runs in a special car and hitchhiking?

Can the insurance company refuse to pay for the private car running and taking the private car? The answer is no.

Because the insurance clauses provided by the insurer generally stipulate that during the insurance period, if the insured motor vehicle is modified, installed or engaged in business transportation, resulting in a significant increase in the risk of the insured motor vehicle, it shall promptly notify the insurer in writing. Otherwise, the insurer shall not be liable for the insured accident caused by the significant increase in the risk of the insured motor vehicle.

At the same time, Article 52 of the Insurance Law stipulates that if the risk of the subject matter insured increases significantly within the validity period of the contract, the insured shall promptly notify the insurer in accordance with the contract. If the insured fails to fulfill the notification obligation stipulated in the preceding paragraph and the risk of the subject matter insured increases significantly, the insurer shall not be liable for compensation. Based on the above-mentioned legal provisions and contractual agreements, the insurer generally does not pay compensation for traffic accidents caused by operating activities after non-operating vehicles are insured.

However, if you want to say that the private car ran a special car and took a ride, can the insurance company refuse to pay? The answer is no.

First of all, refusing to pay compensation just because the private car is in danger when running a car or hitchhiking is not in line with the legislative intention of Article 52 of the Insurance Law, nor does it conform to the rules of evidence.

1, China's insurance law does not clearly define what is a significant increase in the degree of danger, let alone clearly classify business transportation as a significant increase in the degree of danger.

2. Only if there is a causal relationship between the significant increase in the risk of the subject matter insured and the occurrence of the insured accident can the insurer be exempted from liability, and the burden of proof lies with the insurer. According to judicial practice, national legislation and precedents, the principle of proximate cause is generally adopted to judge whether the insurer (insurance company) should bear the insurance liability. The so-called proximate cause refers to the most direct, effective and main cause of loss. If the insurer wants to be exempted from liability, it needs to prove that private car driving and hitchhiking are the most direct, effective, main or dominant causes of losses, and only need to prove that the order between them has not fulfilled the burden of proof.

Secondly, judging from the current judicial practice, the insurance company's claim for refusing compensation has not been supported by the court.

Jinhua Intermediate People's Court (20 10) Zhejiang Jinminzhongzi No.564 civil judgment pointed out that other evidence provided by Yongan Property Insurance failed to fully prove that the situation in which the insured's family car was used for profit-making rental business in this case was "the risk of the subject matter insured increased significantly" as stipulated in Article 52 of People's Republic of China (PRC) Insurance Law, and considering the damage consequences of the victim's death caused by the traffic accident in this case and the possibility of the obligee obtaining compensation, Yongan Finance was sued. Wenzhou Intermediate People's Court held a hearing on (20 10) Zhejiang Wenmin Zhongzi No. 1847 the civil judgment holds that "Dai leased the vehicle to Hongyun Leasing Company, but its use has not changed after the lease, and the driver of the leased vehicle also holds a valid driver's license, and the danger of the vehicle has not increased. Yong 'an Insurance Company does not agree that Dai will lease the insured vehicle to the leasing company, and Yong 'an Insurance Company cannot agree.

Therefore, the insurer can't refuse to pay compensation just on the basis of the traffic accident that happened when the private car was hitchhiking or doing car business. In fact, there is no evidence that there is a causal relationship between private car hitchhiking, private car business and insurance accidents.