Even private car owners who buy auto insurance every year, I am afraid that few people know this law. Some people may say, why can't a driver get compensation if he kills or injures a relative, or if the driver himself is killed or injured in an accident?
"Many car insurance contracts do exist. This is a contract agreement. But I personally think it is very inhuman and unreasonable! " Lawyer Yang Xueyuan, director of Zhejiang Zhijiang Law Firm, said, "The CIRC originally set this clause to prevent fraudulent insurance: our own people colluded in an accident and got compensation by beating our own people, or our relatives used the accident as an excuse to deliberately hurt the uninformed other party, thus harming others and benefiting themselves."
Yang Xueyuan said that this assumption of the China Insurance Regulatory Commission is extremely low in real life. "Who will make fun of their loved ones? If you want to cheat insurance, can't your loved ones cheat? "
There are also many disputes about the understanding of "family members" in the clause. Yang Xueyuan believes that the so-called family should refer to immediate family members.
"The contract is negotiated between the insurance company and the owner, but can I change this clause? If I want to change it, the insurance company will definitely disagree: you want to buy it, that's it, or you don't buy it. " In fact, every insurance company has the same agreement on this, and the owner has no choice.
Yang Xueyuan called for the adjustment of the agreement in this format contract from the level of the China Insurance Regulatory Commission.
/kloc-at 8 o'clock in the evening of June, 2008, in the underground garage of Sunshine Du Ming Community in Fenghua, Ningbo, the wife who had just got a driver's license for one month drove into the warehouse with her husband standing behind the car and commanding.
Sadly, the wife put her husband behind the car and between the car and the wall when reversing, which led to her husband's death, and the wife herself was killed because her head stuck out of the car. ...
The couple, who were originally very rich, died suddenly because of a reversing accident, leaving their eldest daughter who had just finished the middle school entrance examination and their youngest daughter who was only 6 years old.
After this tragedy was reported by many media yesterday, it caused an uproar on the Internet.
While sympathizing with this family, some netizens lamented that they hoped that the money for auto insurance claims could be left to a pair of young daughters, which could only comfort their hearts a little. However, it is estimated that it is difficult to obtain high compensation.
Contract terms: no compensation for killing family members.
Under normal circumstances, cars are often insured with compulsory insurance, driving insurance and commercial third party liability insurance.
Among them, the maximum compensation amount of compulsory insurance is 6.5438+0.22 million yuan. Driving insurance, private cars are generally insured 1, 000 yuan/person ×5 people.
Commercial third-party liability insurance, the coverage of most private cars is 500,000 yuan (generally, the maximum is not more than 1 10,000 yuan, and a few car owners will choose the grades of 200,000 yuan and 300,000 yuan).
Due to this design of commercial insurance, once a private car collides with a person, causing casualties to a third party outside the car, the maximum compensation can be about 620,000 yuan, including compulsory insurance and commercial third party liability insurance.
Let's assume that this lady's car in Fenghua is insured in the above three ways.
In the auto insurance contracts of many insurance companies, there is such an exemption clause about third party liability insurance:
"The insured motor vehicle causes the following casualties or property losses, regardless of whether the insured should be liable for compensation in law, the insurer is not responsible for compensating the losses under the third party liability insurance: the casualties of the insured and his family members, and the loss of all or escrow property; Personal injury or death of the driver of the insured motor vehicle and his family members, and loss of all or escrow property; ……"
The simple interpretation of the above clause is that drivers who kill their loved ones will not be able to get compensation.
This clause originated from the Model Automobile Insurance Contract of China Insurance Regulatory Commission.
I looked it up, and the car insurance I insured by PICC P&C Company was exactly the same. The reporter checked the exemption clauses of PICC, Ping 'an, Tianan, Tian Ping, Pacific and other auto insurance, and there is an agreement that family members are exempt from compensation for casualties caused by accidents.
If according to this clause, Fenghua and his wife killed their husbands by driving, but their husbands could not get the 500,000 compensation; When the accident happened, the husband was outside the car, so the driving insurance for 1 10,000 yuan/person could not be compensated. The wife belongs to the driver in the car, and the maximum amount of compensation for driving insurance is 1 000 yuan. Compulsory compulsory traffic insurance is not restricted by the above provisions, and the maximum compensation amount can reach 6.5438+0.22 million yuan. Therefore, if the relatives of husband and wife apply to the insurance company, I'm afraid they can only get a total compensation of about 6.5438+0.3 million yuan.
Is it possible to win the lawsuit against the insurance company?
For example, Yang Xueyuan said that about ten years ago, one of his relatives accidentally killed his daughter when reversing. At that time, even compulsory insurance had not been introduced, and the insurance company did not pay a penny. "Although I am a lawyer, I can't help you."
Does that mean that in the face of an unmistakable exemption contract, the relatives of the couple in Fenghua, Ningbo will not be able to get a penny of compensation from the third party liability insurance?
According to Yang Xueyuan's analysis, because the standard clauses are controversial in the insurance industry and in the legal field, there will be occasional lawsuits, and the owner will win the case and the insurance company will lose the case.
In one case, the court finally ruled that although the husband killed his wife, in addition to the husband, the parents and children of the deceased also filed lawsuits for their rights. They are also indirect victims of car accidents and beneficiaries of death compensation and pensions. Even if the husband is presumed to be at fault, it will not affect other beneficiaries to get compensation, and the terms of the insurance company are invalid.
In a few cases, the court ruled that the exemption clause aggravated the liability of the insured: the exemption clause was not clearly informed to the insured, so it was invalid.
Of course, Yang Xueyuan said that in recent years, Zhejiang insurance companies have listed the exemption clauses on a single piece of paper and asked the owner to sign for confirmation, indicating that the insurance company has fulfilled its obligation to inform, so it is difficult for the owner to obtain court support for this reason.
A similar case happened in Hangzhou.
The two sides finally settled the case through mediation.
There have been similar cases in Hangzhou.
On July 3, 2008, a girl who just turned two was accidentally involved in a car accident, and the driver was the child's biological father. The grieving child's mother then took the child's father, the vehicle affiliated unit and the insurance company to court, claiming 6.5438+0.86 million yuan.
When the Jianggan District People's Court tried the case, the insurance company said that before the criminal part of the accident was found out, it could not be ruled out that the deceased father deliberately hit his own child by car, and at the same time, according to the clause of "no compensation for the injured or dead family members" in the insurance contract, it requested the court to reject the child's mother's petition or suspend the trial to rule out the "moral hazard" in this case.
It is reported that the case was finally settled through mediation, and the insurance company gave the girl's mother a certain amount of claims.
Have objections to the format contract.
An explanation should be made in favor of the insured.
According to the report of Nanfang Daily on June 3rd, 20th18th, a man named Hu was killed when he rushed to his son not far from home. The family was sad, but he also encountered the problem of refusing insurance.
The court finally found that Hu was not suspected of defrauding insurance, and "killing family members without compensation" was a standard clause. In the event of a dispute, it should be explained in a way that is beneficial to the insured and the beneficiary. Therefore, according to the commercial third party liability insurance (the accident vehicle is only insured for 300,000 yuan), the insurance company is awarded a compensation of 300,000 yuan.
If it is not clearly marked, the exemption clause is invalid.
According to Chongqing Evening News 20 12, 165438, Xiaoli ran over her two-year-old son when reversing, and the insurance company refused to pay compensation. After the trial, the court held that the exemption clause was not clearly marked and clearly stated, and its legitimacy was in doubt; However, Xiaoli herself is the infringer of her son's death, and she is also at fault. The insurance company should appropriately reduce the compensation fee. Accordingly, the court organized the two parties to reach a mediation agreement, and the insurance company compensated Jia Xiaoli 1.7 million yuan.
The attorney in this case proposed to the CIRC to cancel the insurance company's regulations on compensation exemption for families who were killed or died.
Unless it is proved that the driver deliberately hit someone.
Otherwise, the exemption clause is invalid.
According to the report of qianjiang evening news on April 20th, 20 12, a local man in Yangran, Xiao Man, knocked down his 1 year-old daughter while reversing, and the insurance company refused to pay compensation. The court held that the deductible clause was not applicable unless there was evidence that Xiao Yang was intentional; However, Xiao Yang has a major fault and should reduce the insurance compensation. Finally, after mediation by the judge, the insurance company compensated 225,000 yuan.