Towing accident, who is to blame?

OO "SOCIETY FOR SUPPORT TO MOTORISTS"

Accident while towing. Help me figure it out.

Maxim 22 Jan 2013

eric_land Jan 23, 2013

Who is a Passat driver to a Golf driver?

How exactly can a Passat driver be at fault for an accident?

Maxim 23 Jan 2013

Who is a Passat driver to a Golf driver?

How exactly can a Passat driver be at fault for an accident?

The driver of the Passat is nothing like the driver of the Golf. The driver of the Golf caught him on the road and asked him to drag him to a hundred.
The traffic police said that the driver of the Passat was at fault. They say that since he was dragging, he is at fault.

amd_extreme Jan 23, 2013

revol Jan 23, 2013

dcridoo Jan 23, 2013

Maxim 23 Jan 2013

Do you have copies of the protocol, diagram, etc.?

There is nothing. They didn’t give me any papers at all.

Maxim 23 Jan 2013

YFABC Jan 23, 2013

dcridoo Jan 23, 2013

Maxim 23 Jan 2013

Yes Yes. Do so. Write a request to familiarize yourself with the materials of the accident. There were samples on the forum. Look it up.

Thank you, tomorrow I will go to the traffic police and take all copies of the documents

eric_land Jan 23, 2013

Yes Yes. Do so. Write a request to familiarize yourself with the materials of the accident. There were samples on the forum. Look it up.

Thank you, tomorrow I will go to the traffic police and take all copies of the documents

Threaten that you will appeal the actions of the IDP to the prosecutor's office, otherwise you will not move them.

Maxim 24 Jan 2013

Krass 24 Jan 2013

YFABC Jan 24, 2013

Severyanin Jan 24, 2013

Now it will be much easier for you. Either let him borrow it or go to court. It will be there, guaranteed.

What is guaranteed?
Court decision?
If desired.
and having a good lawyer from the recovering party, money can be recovered within 5 years or more. Ruslan Viktorovich will confirm if he wants.
I have.
personal experience, it’s just a crapshoot of something to take from someone, bailiffs are still those grabbers. damn$$$ And it’s like water off a duck’s back.. at least complain.
one gets fired, another comes and everything starts again. It needs to happen right away.

Denis Shevchenko (Moder) Jan 24, 2013

Now it will be much easier for you. Either let him borrow it or go to court. It will be there, guaranteed.

What is guaranteed?
Court decision?
If desired.
and having a good lawyer from the recovering party, money can be recovered within 5 years or more. Ruslan Viktorovich will confirm if he wants.
I have.
personal experience, it’s just a crapshoot of something to take from someone, bailiffs are still those grabbers. damn$$$ And it’s like water off a duck’s back.. at least complain.
one gets fired, another comes and everything starts again. It needs to happen right away.

It can be recovered only if he actually has something from the property. but if there is nothing behind the soul, then of course it’s a problem.

Maxim 24 Jan 2013

Severyanin Jan 24, 2013

It can be recovered only if he actually has something from the property. but if there is nothing behind the soul, then of course it’s a problem.

This is all bullshit.
there are so many problems... for every decision of the judge, a complaint is filed... the court considers it. makes a decision on legality.. appeal to a higher court.. and this is all the time. Yes, and the judge... it’s still that kind of beast. where the assholes never dreamed of their fees... trust me.

Denis Shevchenko (Moder) Jan 24, 2013

It can be recovered only if he actually has something from the property. but if there is nothing behind the soul, then of course it’s a problem.

This is all bullshit.
there are so many problems... for every decision of the judge, a complaint is filed... the court considers it. makes a decision on legality.. appeal to a higher court.. and this is all the time. Yes, and the judge... it’s still that kind of beast. where the assholes never dreamed of their fees... trust me.

you said something about an appeal. oh, I’m talking about the execution of a court decision. Over time, I agree, it’s a long story and not everyone is ready to endure it all, endurance is needed.

Rules for towing a car with a flexible hitch

No motorist is completely insured against unpleasant situations on the road. At any moment, the car can simply break down, or, even worse, get into an accident. One way or another, the faulty car will have to be evacuated to a repair site or parking lot. But not every driver remembers how to properly tow a car using a flexible hitch or using other types of towing: a rigid hitch, as well as the partial/full loading method. Sooner or later, every motorist is faced with such a need. Therefore, in this article we will analyze in detail the rules for towing a car on a flexible hitch (SDA), and also identify all the “pitfalls” that can lie in wait for this type of car evacuation.

Why a flexible hitch? It's simple: the most popular category of driver's license is category “B1”. At the same time, a flexible hitch for passenger cars is the most common and frequently used method of evacuation. Therefore, the vast majority of drivers use it when towing. Almost all cars have a tow rope (strap or halyard). Along with a first aid kit and a fire extinguisher, it is included in a mandatory kit for a motorist.

Rules for towing motor vehicles

To fully understand all the nuances, let’s look at what Chapter 20 of the traffic rules of the Russian Federation looks like, completely dedicated to towing (of any type for all types of vehicles):

These are the points you need to consider before starting towing. And only if you fully comply with all of the above, proceed to it. Otherwise, it’s better not to tempt fate, but simply call a tow truck.

Procedure and interaction of drivers

1. The tower must drive up backwards to the front of the towed vehicle at a distance of 2.5-3.5 meters so that it is convenient to attach the cable.
2. Check the towing eyes on both vehicles. They must be securely fastened. They should not have serious mechanical damage or deep rust.
3. How to tie a tow rope? In case of force majeure, when there are no carabiners on the rope, it is better to use a special non-tightening knot for towing a car (the so-called “towing knot”). And if they are available, it is better to use the following method: the carabiner is completely inserted into the eyelet, and then snapped onto the cable. This method of fastening is more reliable.
4. Discuss the final destination and route in advance, and also agree on the signals to be used, for example, “blinking” high beams in a towed car will mean that an urgent stop is needed. Or you can simply agree to communicate by mobile phone, of course, only if you have a headset, speakerphone or a “hands free” system, because The fine for using a cell phone while driving is 1,500 rubles.
5. Be sure to insert the key into the ignition switch of the towed vehicle to prevent the steering wheel from jamming, and also place the gear shift lever in the “neutral” position.
6. In the “tug”, turn on the low beams, and in the towed car, turn on the “hazard lights”.
7. Now the cars are ready and you can start driving. The towing vehicle should move off as smoothly as possible without jerking and also smoothly change lanes, slow down and stop. Both drivers need to ensure that there is no slack in the tow rope. To ensure constant tension, the driver who is pulling must change gears as quickly as possible, and the second must constantly brake. Sagging can lead to sudden jerks during start-up, or to collision with the cable, which will most likely result in the rupture of the flexible coupling or damage to the towing eyes. It is also important not to overdo the brakes and prevent them from overheating.

Distance and location of vehicles

Some Important Features You Shouldn't Forget

When the engine of a towed vehicle is not running, some of its systems operate differently:

• in damp weather the windows fog up, and in cold weather they freeze, because... the “stove” is not functioning;
• The power steering does not work; turning the steering wheel requires a lot of effort;
• the brake pedal becomes as if “wooden”, its travel decreases, the vehicle brakes worse.

Therefore, it will be extremely difficult for a person with any injuries or a small, fragile girl to drive a towed car.

Which cable is better for towing a car?

There are 3 main types of cables for towing a vehicle on a flexible hitch:

1. synthetic;
2. fabric;
3. steel.

Let's take a closer look at the positive and negative qualities of each type of flexible coupling.

Synthetic rope

A cable made of synthetic materials is the most common among drivers. In recent years, nylon and nylon halyards have gained particular popularity. Cables made of polyvinyl chloride and Kevlar are slightly less popular.

The main advantages of these materials:

• weight – they weigh relatively little;
• strength - quite a bit inferior to steel cables (except for Kevlar, which is superior to steel);
• compactness - takes up little space in the trunk;
• price – they are relatively cheap (again, except for Kevlar).

Main disadvantages:

• in the absence of a special casing, they quickly rub against asphalt;
• very often they do not withstand the load (the manufacturer plays a big role).

Steel rope

• strength and reliability - withstand high tension;
• resistance to abrasion - long service life.

Main disadvantages:

• volume – take up a lot of space;
• weight – the heaviest of all types of flexible couplings;
• danger - if ruptured, it can seriously damage both the car and the driver.

Fabric rope

This is the most unpopular type of towing device today. Despite its advantages: cheapness, lightness and compactness, such a cable does not perform its main functions well. It frays quite quickly, cannot withstand basic loads, constantly gets wet and rots quickly.

Other important characteristics

When choosing a towing cable, pay attention to a couple more important points:

• The length of the tow rope for a passenger car according to traffic regulations is from 4 to 6 meters;
• the tow rope must be equipped with red flags or reflective red and white shields (20x20cm).

Analyzing the pros and cons of the listed types, we can draw an unambiguous conclusion: for towing cars, halyards made of synthetic materials are most suitable; for towing trucks, it is better to use a steel cable.

Hazard warning and symbols of towed and towing

When first faced with a situation where a car needs to be towed, a novice driver immediately asks questions: who, according to the rules, should turn on the emergency lights when towing and does the towing car need to turn them on?

Light signals when towing a car

According to the rules, the hazard lights on a towed motor vehicle must be switched on in any case. In tunnels and at night, the towed person must turn on the side lights. The tower must turn on the low beam headlights.

Emergency sign

Many will ask: “What to do if the evacuee’s battery runs out? How should a towed vehicle be identified if there is no or faulty hazard warning light? The answer is simple - in this case, you need to attach an emergency stop sign to the rear of the vehicle.

Speed ​​while towing

According to the rules, the maximum speed when towing a faulty car is 50 km/h , regardless of where it happens - outside the city (on the highway) or in a populated area. However, it is worth considering that the speed on highways is limited to a lower mark of 40 km/h. So, if the towing and broken vehicles in a combination cannot move faster, they should not use such roads.

When is it prohibited to tow a car?

At the beginning of the article, we already reviewed the rules, from paragraph 20.4 of which it is clear that towing with a flexible hitch is prohibited in the following cases: a faulty braking system or steering system, towing several vehicles, and also in icy conditions. In addition, towing is prohibited if there is a sign 3.7 (“Moving with a trailer is prohibited”). You cannot yet transport people in a towed vehicle. In order not to violate towing rules, it is recommended to use a towing service.

Other questions often arise:

Is it possible to tow a car without insurance? The answer is NO! This is equivalent to the usual driving of a vehicle without insurance, and therefore the corresponding penalty is 800 rubles.

Is it legal to tow a car at night? The answer is NOT ALWAYS! Towing at night is permitted only with working side lights.

Can an inexperienced driver participate in towing? The answer is NO! From April 4, 2017, only a driver with more than 2 years of experience can drive a towed vehicle.

Fines for violating the rules

The fine for violating the rules of towing a car on a flexible hitch is 500 rubles . But a much more severe punishment is a collision between the towing vehicle and the towed vehicle with very unpleasant consequences. Therefore, there is no need to neglect them.

Who is to blame for an accident when towing with a flexible hitch?

Most often, in case of an accident between a towed vehicle and the towing vehicle, the culprit is the one who was behind (clause 10.1 of the Rules). However, all the circumstances of the accident are clarified during the analysis, and in rare cases the decision on the presence of fault may differ.

OSAGO and towing: looking for the culprit of “tort”

The coupling of motor vehicles for towing one another is mediated by a civil towing agreement. In this case, towing two or more vehicles is prohibited by clause 20.4 of the Road Traffic Rules. Such relationships should also not be confused with a road train, where a mechanical vehicle is coupled to a trailer.

The distinctive essence is that each motor vehicle is powered by its own engine, while towing requires the traction force of the towing vehicle to move the towed vehicle.

When towing, each vehicle remains legally independent of each other.

Sometimes the hitch (flexible or rigid) breaks and a collision occurs between the vehicles involved in the towing, causing mechanical damage to each. Since there is an interaction between sources of increased danger, relations resulting from causing harm are subject to the rules of general tort (Article 1064 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

In practice, the problem of determining exactly the insurer obligated to pay the insurance compensation under compulsory motor liability insurance is posed: the one who insured the liability of the owner of the towed or towing car.

At the end of 2009, this issue was submitted to the Scientific Advisory Council at the Federal Arbitration Court of the North Caucasus District. To avoid accusations of misinterpretation of the conclusion, I will give its full text: “Insurance compensation must be paid by the insurance company that insured the liability of the owner of the towed car, since under the MTPL policy of the owner of the towed car, the civil liability of any legal owner, including the owner, is also considered insured the main vehicle to which the towed vehicle is attached via a rigid coupling. An insured event occurs because harm was caused to another person when using a vehicle, therefore the insurance company has an obligation to make an insurance payment”[1].

It is noteworthy that the question itself was about choosing an obligated insurer under compulsory motor liability insurance, and not about another type of insurance! To refute the conclusion recommended to the courts, it is necessary to refer to the classification of types of insurance. OSAGO refers to property insurance, represented in domestic civil law by three types: property insurance, civil liability and business risks. The name itself refers it to the second type, and the latter is divided into tort liability insurance (Article 931 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) and contractual liability insurance (Article 932 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

By virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 6 of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance, the object of compulsory insurance is property interests associated with the risk of civil liability of the owner of the vehicle for obligations arising from harm to the life, health or property of victims when using the vehicle on the territory of the Russian Federation. Thus, MTPL is a type of tort liability insurance that arises in the event of a non-contractual violation of absolute rights that results in harm. Thus, under MTPL agreements, only liability arising on the basis of the provisions of Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation can be insured.

Now it is necessary to determine the legal nature of the towing relationship. An analysis of the system of legal facts that can serve as grounds for the emergence of civil rights and obligations (Article 8 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) leads to an unambiguous conclusion about the possibility of a towing legal relationship arising solely on the basis of an agreement of the parties - a civil contract (towing). This agreement is not directly enshrined in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, but is known in the system of transport agreements.

The rules on tort liability (Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) do not apply to contractual relations, with the exception of cases of so-called “producer liability” (§ 3 of Chapter 59 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation).

The responsibility of the parties to any agreement, including a towing agreement, within the framework of the relative legal relationship of the counterparties is based on the norms of Chapter 25 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Such liability is called contractual in civil law, the risk of which is insured on the basis of Art. 932 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.

OSAGO is a type of insurance for the risk of tort liability arising from non-contractual harm.

Accordingly, due to the fact that when towing, the relations of the parties are always based on an agreement, when harm is caused within the framework of the “tug - towed” relationship (i.e., if we are not talking about causing harm to third parties), a tortious legal relationship cannot arise. Contractual liability risk insurance relationships are not covered by the MTPL legislation. In the last example, the insured event under compulsory motor liability insurance did not occur. Accordingly, in answer to the question posed about the insurance company that will be obliged to make a payment under the MTPL agreement, it should be said that neither the insurance company of the tug nor the insurance company of the towed vehicle should pay insurance compensation under the MTPL.

[1] Reference materials for the meeting of the scientific advisory council at the Federal Arbitration Court of the North Caucasus District on November 27, 2009 (Question 12). – Stavropol, 2009. pp. 28 – 29.

Towing accident, who is to blame?

Another car, which was being pulled by a Gazelle on a rope, crashed into my car, which was standing on the side of the road.
For some reason, the towed vehicle pulled blindly to the side of the road; as a result of the impact, the car moved forward and mine crashed into a pole. The accident report says that the tugboat did not have any traffic violations, I also do not have any, and the towed one had a violation of clauses 10.1 and 1.5 + art.
24.5.2 COAP. There is no protocol or resolution yet, because driver of towed car in hospital.

Who is the culprit? One, both?

A rare case: I completely agree with the conclusions of the Gaians. It is thanks to Art. 1.5 the towed person must be “in the shadow” of the tug and not stick out without good reason. In Art. 10.1 talks about braking and about the distance and about the interval - about everything that was violated by the brainless action of the driver of the towed car.

I'm afraid this can no longer be proven, but the bunch was moving clearly in excess of the permitted 50 km/h. Indirect evidence - my car will be considered completely destroyed with a 99% probability. After the impact, the cars moved forward by about a body, with my car standing on the handbrake and gear, and the energy of the impact was sufficient for the pole to reach almost the engine.

I'm wondering if the number of culprits matters and in what case?

I'm afraid this can no longer be proven, but the bunch was moving clearly in excess of the permitted 50 km/h. Indirect evidence - my car will be considered completely destroyed with a 99% probability. After the impact, the cars moved forward by about a body, with my car standing on the handbrake and gear, and the energy of the impact was sufficient for the pole to reach almost the engine.

I'm wondering if the number of culprits matters and in what case?

It has.
If there were 2 violators, then you can count on 2 compulsory motor liability insurance, 1 from each. this is if the damage is more than 120,000. Although, it will be difficult for someone towed to exceed the speed on their own.

By the way, this is an interesting case. in terms of prospects for butting and shaking out money from the insurance company.

It has. If there were 2 violators, then you can count on 2 compulsory motor liability insurance, 1 from each. this is if the damage is more than 120,000.

I have CASCO insurance, so I have to fight with the insurance company.
It is noteworthy that the second culprit (if recognized as such) is insured under compulsory motor liability insurance in the same insurance company as my car.

I'm afraid this can no longer be proven, but the bunch was moving clearly in excess of the permitted 50 km/h. Indirect evidence - my car will be considered completely destroyed with a 99% probability. After the impact, the cars moved forward by about a body, with my car standing on the handbrake and gear, and the energy of the impact was sufficient for the pole to reach almost the engine.

I'm wondering if the number of culprits matters and in what case?
As for explicitness, about it (as I understand it) it’s clear only to you for now.
My agreement with violation 10.1 concerned only the obligation to brake and maintain a lateral interval.
The driver could brake and thus change the speed of the pair of vehicles. The towed vehicle could not change lanes. I didn't even think about speeding while towing.

As for CASCO, I do not know the principles of action of the insurance company in relation to recourse claims. What I mean is that one day they may want to receive the money spent from the insurance company under compulsory motor liability insurance and a certain amount from the culprit of the accident, and they may talk about joint and several liability with the insurance company and the tug driver. (I'm no expert, my ideas may be far-fetched)

I have CASCO insurance, so I have to fight with the insurance company.
It is noteworthy that the second culprit (if recognized as such) is insured under compulsory motor liability insurance in the same insurance company as my car.

Which insurance company CASCO?
What are the next actions? 10.5 apply or full cost - wear and tear - usable balances?

Reso. Most likely 10.5, because... If the remaining balance remains valid, there will not be enough funds to repay the loan. Tomorrow the assessment will become clearer.

Clear.
If RESO, that means AENKOM will evaluate it. In principle, a normal appraiser.

Clear. If RESO, that means AENKOM will evaluate it.

The assessment is carried out by KAR-EX LLC - they sit in the same place as the Reso payment department.
Today there was an inspection and the damage was recorded. According to the expert, 99.99% total. He also noticed that the body was distorted - 16 hours to correct. Calculation will come later.

. In Art. 10.1 talks about braking and about the distance and about the interval - about everything that was violated by the brainless action of the driver of the towed car.

Dear Ravil!
If it’s not too difficult for you, please quote where exactly in clause 10.1 of the Rules it says about the distance and the interval (perhaps you have some new edition of the Rules, which is not yet known to anyone, but before that the distance and side interval were mentioned only in clause 9.10). If you do not find them in the text of clause 10.1, then I earnestly ask you not to mislead everyone in the future and read the Rules more carefully. At the same time, it is completely unclear how the driver of a towed vehicle can choose a distance, which during towing depends solely on the length of the hitch, and what relation does the distance to the vehicle moving in front have in general, i.e. to the towing vehicle, to this accident, and what does the lateral interval have to do with it, if there was a collision with the rear of a parked vehicle, and not tangential contact with the side surfaces. And, finally, it should be noted that the use of braking by the driver of a towed vehicle is, of course, possible, but may turn out to be ineffective if, for example, some gr. the vehicle is being towed by a passenger vehicle. Such actions will only lead to increased tire wear, and if the towing cable is already worn out enough, this can ultimately lead to its breakage, which does not at all increase traffic safety. By the way, clause 20.4 (part 3) provides for towing in general “with an inactive brake system,” but under a number of conditions (including not using a flexible hitch). It seems much more important to check whether clause 20.3 was fulfilled in relation to the length of the coupling link, and both participants in the towing process should be responsible for its failure (unless, of course, the “driven” was forcibly chained to the steering wheel).
You can also add, for information, that several years ago in the magazine “Behind the Wheel” there was an article in which the contradiction between the requirements of clause 20.3 (on the length of the flexible coupling) and ensuring road safety (ideally, the length of the flexible coupling link should tend to 0). In addition, automotive experts have long been aware of the “technical incompatibility” of these requirements with the set of requirements of clause 9.10 on safe distance and clause 10.4 (part 1) on towing speed. Otherwise, the discussion of the accident itself has obviously ended and moved into a discussion of insurance, which belongs to another section.
I hope that there will be no problems with its payment.
I wish you success! ___
Sincerely, Konstantin Staroselsky.

Perm Forum – Teron.online

The car was hit while being towed.

Stoxx 12/11/2006 - 09:37

Navigator 12/11/2006 - 10:04

Stoxx 12/11/2006 - 10:48

The towing was carried out in accordance with all the rules (rope length, speed, etc.), accordingly (if Article 12.21 of the Code of Administrative Offenses was meant), the inspectors do not see such a violation.

The accident occurred as a result of technical malfunction of the towing vehicle.

SilverMan 12/11/2006 — 11:43

You yourself wrote here who is to blame.

OSAGO - liability in case of an accident.
If you are at fault, your insurance company pays for you, if someone drove into you, their insurance company pays you. Find the culprit and prove it - then it will be an insured event. And in theory, with your compulsory motor liability insurance, you should pay the newspaper writer.

OSAGO is not CASCO.
Many (newbies) don’t think about this. According to compulsory motor liability insurance, the culprit is paid to the one who is not at fault!

Navigator 12/11/2006 - 12:23

The towing was carried out in accordance with all the rules (rope length, speed, etc.), accordingly (if Article 12.21 of the Code of Administrative Offenses was meant), the inspectors do not see such a violation.

The accident occurred as a result of technical malfunction of the towing vehicle.

Darth_Vader 11.12.2006 - 12:34

MIV 11.12.2006 - 12:37

SilverMan 12/11/2006 — 12:50

If so, a written refusal from the insurance company and a lawsuit!

I didn’t understand then who wanted to get insurance.

Navigator 12/11/2006 - 12:55

If so, a written refusal from the insurance company and a lawsuit!

I didn’t understand then who wanted to get insurance.

Stoxx 11.12.2006 - 14:03

You yourself wrote here who is to blame.

OSAGO - liability in case of an accident.
If you are at fault, your insurance company pays for you, if someone drove into you, their insurance company pays you. Find the culprit and prove it - then it will be an insured event. And in theory, with your compulsory motor liability insurance, you should pay the newspaper writer.

OSAGO is not CASCO.
Many (newbies) don’t think about this. According to compulsory motor liability insurance, the culprit is paid to the one who is not at fault!

No, I’m not so “weak” as not to distinguish CASCO from compulsory motor liability insurance and not know how the payment under compulsory motor liability insurance goes.
The vehicle that was towed did not receive any damage, and we are talking about paying compensation to ME, because... I don’t think I am to blame for this accident. And it is impossible to react quickly when a car walking 3 meters ahead “slams on the brakes.” By the way, if it weren’t for my quick reaction, the damage would not have been limited to a broken headlight.

Recently, the insurance of the driver of the Niva that was towing me (and not a gazelle, by the way) had a similar case - while towing, the driver of the towing car accidentally caught a woman weaving along the side of the road with his mirror, got confused in fear and slammed on the brake, as a result of which the car driving from behind on a rope flew into his ass. Reimbursement was denied.

The law on compulsory motor liability insurance contains a clause (clause 2 of article 6) stating that the event is not considered insured in the event of “damage caused by the driver to the vehicle he is driving and its trailer, the cargo they transport, or the equipment installed on them;”

The question arises: can a car towed on a flexible hitch be considered a trailer, and can a technical malfunction “harm caused by the driver .”

And also, is “towing” a vehicle its “use”?
Post edited by Stoxx: 12/11/2006 - 14:36

SilverMan 12/12/2006 - 09:39

The subject of insurance under compulsory motor liability insurance is the liability of the person responsible for the accident in monetary terms. If there is no culprit, there is no responsibility.

The law “who is last is the pope” has not yet been repealed.
To consider yourself guilty or not is a purely personal matter for everyone, and the insurance company pays according to a certificate from the traffic police, or according to a court decision on the guilt of the insured; everything else does not relate to the subject of insurance under compulsory motor liability insurance.

If you want to receive compulsory motor liability insurance, find the culprit, prove it, and receive insurance compensation from his ( and not yours ).
Post edited by SilverMan: 12/12/2006 - 09:40

Inspar 12/12/2006 - 11:02

Much still depends on the insurance company itself. For example, if you can prove that the accident occurred due to force majeure and the traffic police confirms this and such cases are taken into account in the insurance, then you have every right to compensation for losses.

Roughly speaking, if you drive into someone, then you are always to blame if you cannot prove that you did not have the opportunity to stop.