In the best case, after a traffic accident, the injured party receives 100% of all damage items (e.g. repair costs, depreciation, expert costs, loss of use compensation or rental car, flat-rate expenses) from the vehicle liability insurance of the other party involved in the accident, because the liability situation is clear and the other party involved in the accident and their insurance company are 100% reimbursed % are liable and willing to perform.
However, if the accident victim is partly to blame or if the other party’s motor vehicle liability insurance claims at least a contributory cause of the accident, the damage positions of the accident victim are only compensated on the basis of an (alleged) liability quota.
Example of liability according to quota:
The opposing vehicle liability insurance claims that the injured party is 50% responsible for the traffic accident. In this case, the accident victim receives only 50%, ie half of the claimed damage items. He stays on the other 50%, which can represent a not inconsiderable loss of assets for him (e.g. out of €10,000 in repair costs, he is then only reimbursed €5,000 by the opposing insurance company).
About this annoying circumstance, the additional use of your own fully comprehensive insurance and the application of the so-called quota privilege help away:
About this intended procedure, your own fully comprehensive insurance (hereinafter “comprehensive insurance“) and the opposing motor vehicle liability insurance company as early as possible, ie immediately and right at the beginning of the civil claims settlement.
Claiming your own fully comprehensive insurance for damage to the vehicle:
First of all, your own comprehensive insurance – insofar as it has been taken out and exists – usually only reimburses the actual damage to the vehicle itself in the event of damage (especially repair costs or, in the case of a total loss, the cost of replacement). Additional damage items such as depreciation, expert costs, compensation for loss of use/rental car costs and accident-related flat-rate expenses, which are regularly taken over by the opposing vehicle liability insurance, are usually not compensated by your own comprehensive insurance.
Claiming the opposing vehicle liability insurance for the rest:
The injured party can therefore claim his own comprehensive insurance after the traffic accident in order to repair the damage to the vehicle (in particular through a proper and professional repair at the expense of his own comprehensive insurance). This relieves the opposing vehicle liability insurance initially, because in the example above, according to the (alleged) liability quota, it would have to bear 50% of these costs.
However, the injured party can then take all other positions that are not covered by their own comprehensive insurance and that relate to the direct damage to the vehicle (so-called “positions, who touched the sheet metal“), assert against the motor vehicle liability insurance of the other party involved in the accident, with the special feature that these are then not only compensated proportionately according to the (alleged) liability quota (e.g. in the amount of 50%), but in full, i.e. to 100 % must be compensated. This includes the following positions (“who touched the sheet metal“):
- Deductible incurred by claiming your own comprehensive insurance (e.g. when carrying out a proper and professional repair)
- Accident-related depreciation of the vehicle
- Costs for obtaining a damage report (expert costs)
- towing costs
On the other hand, the opposing vehicle liability insurance only has to settle the following claims proportionately according to the (alleged) liability quota (“positions, who didn’t touch the sheet metal“):
- Compensation for loss of use or costs for using a rental car
- Accident-related expenses (flat rate)
- Upgrading or downgrading damage in your own comprehensive insurance (note: by claiming your own motor vehicle liability insurance, the insurance premiums will increase in the future because you will be upgraded or downgraded in the no-claims class)
- personal injury compensation
Restriction on Quota Privilege:
However, with this settlement method (combined use of one’s own comprehensive insurance and the other party’s motor vehicle liability insurance using the so-called quota right), it should be noted that the other party’s motor vehicle liability insurance is not in a worse position as a result, i.e. with the total amount to be paid to the accident victim than it would be if it had settled the damage from the outset according to its liability quota (including the proportionate assumption of costs for repairing the vehicle damage). In the case of such a combined settlement of claims, it must therefore pay at most as much as it would have had to pay if it had settled the damage from the outset in accordance with its liability quota (including the proportionate assumption of costs for repairing the vehicle damage).
Example of Combined Claim and Quota Privilege:
A traffic accident occurs in which the victim suffers the following injuries:
- Repair costs: €5,000
- Depreciation: €750
- Expert costs: €800
- Towing costs: €500
- Compensation for loss of use: €500 (10 days at €50 per calendar day)
- Expense flat rate: €25
Total: €7,575
The opposing motor vehicle liability insurance now claims (possibly rightly) that the injured party is partially to blame for the accident at 50% and thus a liability quota of 50%. It is therefore prepared to compensate half of each of the damage items mentioned above, i.e. a total of €3,787.50 (€7,575 – 50% of which).
The accident victim is therefore left with a loss of €3,787.50 (which corresponds to his liability quota of 50%).
On the other hand, the combined claim of your own comprehensive insurance and the opposing party’s liability insurance using the so-called quota right in this example is as follows:
With regard to the repair costs, ie with regard to the elimination of the direct damage to the vehicle, the accident victim first claims his own comprehensive insurance, for which there is an insurance contract deductible of €500 in the event of damage. Your own comprehensive insurance will therefore pay an amount of €4,500 on the repair costs incurred of €5,000, while the injured party will have to pay a deductible of €500.
From the opposing vehicle liability insurance, the accident victim then demands a 100% assumption of those damage items that are not covered by their own comprehensive insurance and which relate to the direct vehicle damage (“Positions that have touched the sheet metal“), specifically
- Depreciation: €750
- Expert costs: €800
- Towing costs: €500
- Deductible due to claiming your own comprehensive insurance: €500
Total: €2,550
The other damage items that are not covered by your own comprehensive insurance and do not have to be covered 100% by the opposing motor vehicle liability insurance company can at least be claimed by the opposing insurance company in accordance with the liability quota of 50%, namely
- Compensation for loss of use: €250 (50% of €500)
- Expense flat rate: €12.50 (50% of €25)
- Upgrading or downgrading damage in your own comprehensive insurance (usually cannot yet be quantified, so that the opposing insurance company has to declare its proportional obligation to pay 50% = acknowledgment of debt)
As a result, the accident victim is better off with this combined settlement of claims using the so-called preferential quota than with a pure 50% settlement of claims by the opposing motor vehicle liability insurance company, which would have left him with a loss of €3,787.50. Through the combined use of your own comprehensive insurance and the opposing vehicle liability insurance
- After all, the repair costs of €4,500 were covered by your own comprehensive insurance,
- the deductible of €500 has been compensated 100% by the opposing insurance company by claiming your own comprehensive insurance,
- the depreciation, expert costs and towing costs have been compensated 100% by the opposing insurance company,
- at least 50% of loss of use compensation has been paid (which would also have been the case if the opposing vehicle liability insurance had been claimed),
- at least 50% of the flat-rate expenses have been paid (which would also have been the case if the other party’s motor vehicle liability insurance had been claimed),
- the higher or downgrading damage in your own comprehensive insurance is compensated for at least 50% by the opposing vehicle liability insurance.
The damage that the accident victim is left with is significantly lower.
In the present case, the opposing vehicle liability insurance company is not in a worse position as a result of such a combined claim settlement than if it had simply paid everything according to a quota, which is 50% (= €3,787.50). As a result, the opposing vehicle liability insurance only pays €2,550 on the items that it has to compensate 100% of, as well as compensation for loss of use of €250 (50% of €500) and a flat-rate expense allowance of €12.50 € (50% of €25). In addition, there is a 50% share in the upgrade or downgrading damage in your own comprehensive insurance, which, however, does not lead to the settlement amount exceeding a total of €3,787.50.
Incidentally, any costs for hiring a lawyer to settle claims also belong to those items that the opposing vehicle liability insurance company must compensate proportionately (not 100%) in the case of combined claims settlement, ie according to the (alleged) liability quota.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Have you had a traffic accident in which you may be partly to blame or where it is at least possible that the opposing vehicle liability insurance company could be partly to blame? We examine the question of liability in detail from all relevant points of view and find the best way to ensure that your damage is fully settled or at least kept as small as possible – www.meinunfallpartner.de.
2023-07-16 05:19:05
#socalled #quota #privilege #traffic #law #claims #settlement
