While examining yet another accident-related case, the court pointed out that the law does not provide for the refusal of the accident victim’s insurer to pay out under the direct compensation scheme (DLS).
Another case has reached the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation concerning a traffic accident and disagreements between the insurance companies of the participants in the accident. The dispute between insurers eventually turned into problems for the injured party. So the SC had to explore the possibility of the accident victim’s company refusing to settle the damages under the DSP.
According to ASN, the collision of BMW and Daewoo cars on the Stavropol-Novomaryevka highway occurred on March 13, 2019. The driver of a Korean brand car, who was insured under OSAGO at Nadezhda, was found guilty of the accident, and the owner of the German brand car at Ingosstrakh. The victim turned to her insurer to pay out the amount for the damages that were caused during the accident with Daewoo.
In April, the victim was notified of the refusal to pay compensation for OSAGO, since the insurer of the culprit did not confirm the existence of a contract with the owner of Daewoo. The fact is that when drawing up the documents, the traffic police indicated that the owner of the Daewoo is one citizen, and another person was indicated in the insurance policy issued by CJSC Nadezhda. The new owner bought the car back in January, and an OSAGO agreement was drawn up for it, which implies the admission of an unlimited number of people (however, they never re-registered the vehicle at that time); while at the time of the accident, in March, the previous owner was driving.
According to the results of an independent examination, the cost of restoring a BMW car damaged in that accident amounted to 568.3 thousand rubles (excluding wear and tear) and 435.6 thousand rubles including wear and tear. In September 2019, the victim sent a claim to Ingosstrakh demanding to pay insurance compensation in the amount of 400 thousand rubles and a penalty in the amount of 196 thousand rubles. However, the company refused her, this decision was supported by the financial ombudsman. As a result, the owner of BMW went to court.
During the consideration of the case, the court pointed out that Ingosstrakh had no grounds for refusing insurance compensation, since the new owner issued an OSAGO policy with the admission of an unlimited number of persons. Despite this, the appeal annulled the court decision, and the cassation agreed with this. However, this decision did not suit the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.
The Supreme Court emphasized that the appeal did not answer the question of whether the lack of registration of the Daewoo car with the traffic police for the new owner could be an unconditional basis for refusing to pay insurance compensation to the victim. At the same time, it is noted that the OSAGO agreement, which applies to the car of the culprit, was drawn up in accordance with the law.
During the consideration of this case, the court explained that the law does not provide for the refusal of the insurer of the victim in direct compensation for losses if the insurer of the perpetrator refused to confirm the acceptance of this loss.
As noted in the PCA, the insurer of the culprit of the accident cannot refuse to compensate the insurance company of the victim for the costs of settling the loss if the OSAGO contract of the tortfeasor was valid on the date of the accident. Since CJSC Nadezhda is no longer operating, the payment in this case will be made either by the company that accepted its portfolio (AlfaStrakhovanie) or the Russian Union of Motor Insurers.