×

Loading...
Ad by
Ad by

Thanks a lot for your information. Could you please answer a couple of questions.

I have a couple of specific questions. I was involved in an accident, 100% not at fault. The insurance company arranged with a repair shop to get the car fixed after their appraisal. Is there anything not right in this picture? First, the car will depreciate in thousands of dollars because of the accident. Anybody can obtain the collision record before they buy the car. Second, even if it's repaired in the best shop, the car can never be as good as it is before the accident. There are probably hidden damages remaining on the car that may cause problems and incur considerable repair costs in the future.
I believe if the collision is totally not my fault, the insurance company should cover me in a way that it will not cause me any financial losses and inconveniences. I understand we are not living in an ideal world. However, I still think it's quite unfair if they won't cover any depreciations and hidden damages to the car. What do you think?
Sign in and Reply Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下家园 / 爱车一族 / 汽车保险浅谈 (1)
    本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛常在这里看到有汽车保险的贴子,不乏真知灼见,也许多谬误讹传,似乎颇有予以“系统化”澄清的必要。等了许久,不见有DX跳出,本人愿意先抛一砖,期有专业人士多多INPUT。

    不过特此声明,本人非相关保险协会认可人员,所提观点均属个人意见,具体条文解释请向律师,保险公司或保险经纪查询。任何人因为循本文之行为而导致任何损失,都与本人无关。

    1) 法律基础:

    任何保险都受相关法律监管和影响,但大概再也没有像汽车保险这样深了。这里首先有必要对相关的法律作一简单介绍。

    在加拿大,三级法律都有关于汽车驾驶的规定和要求。联邦Criminal Code Of Canada列明醉酒驾驶(每1000ML血液中酒精含量800mg),拒绝提供酒精含量测试,危险驾驶导致身体伤害,出事不顾而去等行为均为刑事行为或罪行;省法律有关于交通规则,行车速度,交通标志的规定,如在ONTARIO的 Highway Traffic Act(HTA);市法律也在其管辖范围内有相关的附例(BY-LAW),例如泊车和行通道。所有以上,并不是意味着一旦违反,车主或驾驶者会丧失所有的保险保障,哪怕此人是偷车贼,后文对此会有涉及。不同的省份有自己不同的法律,虽然在很大程度上都彼此近似。本文仅以ONTARIO为根据。

    汽车保险中所涉及的法律原理有:1)疏忽 (Negligence):疏忽就是做了一个正常人不应该做,或没有做一个正常人应该做的事。在汽车驾驶或操作时(事实上不单是驾驶)因为疏忽而导致他人身体或财产受到伤害,按Common Law 的一般原则驾驶或操作者要对此作出赔偿。具体到汽车,这个赔偿责任被延伸到车辆拥有者,比如说你借车给朋友开,你也可能会被要求对他人损失负责赔偿,所以在借车给别人开时要先对对方的车技经验有个了解。2)举证责任 (Onus of Proof):Common Law 的一般原则是举证责任落在提诉讼或要求的一方,即要证明对方有疏忽或过错。但在汽车事故的案件中有个例外,即是涉及到行人的时候,有关法律规定在这个时候驾驶人员被首先默任是过错方,要反过来证明自己是无过错的。3)代位求偿 (Subrogation):简单的说,保险公司在直接赔偿被保险人的损失之后,会获得其响应的权利向有责任的第三方追讨该损失。4)绝对责任(Absolute Liability):任何保险合同都有这样那样的条件要求被保险人遵守,一旦违背,保险公司可以拒绝赔付甚至宣布保险无效。但这样一来无辜第三方可能失去补偿,因为虽然他可以直接向有过错的驾驶者或车主提出诉讼,但不一定可以得到足够的赔偿。所以有法律规定在事故发生后,保险公司不因为被保险人的行为而拒绝赔偿无辜第三方的损失,这被称为绝对责任。

    LD此时发言:“你尽打擦边球,什么东西都只谈一点,法律的问题很复杂,你这样很容易误导观众。”
    愚公回答:“这只是下文准备,没必要要深入,而且在篇首有云此乃管见,观众不应据此行事, 否则律师保险经纪岂不都要事业?”

    2) 强制保险:(Mandatory Insurance)

    在ONTARIO,以下4种保险是强制汽车保险的内容,任何车辆拥有者均须购买。

    1. 第三者责任保险(Thrid Party Liability):
    俗称第三方保险。这里有必要澄清一下,常听到有DX讲自己只买了“第三方保险”,这其实不够准确,因为在ONTARIO,没有可能买这一种保险,我想他大约是在说“只买了强制保险”。第三者保险之所以强制要有,是保证车主在他人身体或财产受到伤害时有一定的赔付能力,这须通过购买保险或开具存款保证书或来证明,且这种证明要开车时“携带”,所以在保险单中付有一张几联的粉色卡片,可以撕下来随身携带,PINK CARD是在全加美统一认可的作法,警察查车时通常也会要求出示该卡。在加拿大, 除PQ外各省对此额度的最低要求均为$200,000.
    2. 意外伤害赔偿(Accident Benefit):
    这是保障自己,配偶,依靠自己或配偶生活者,或其他任何在事故中受伤人员的,包括偷你车开的人(部分内容)。除了ALBERTA和四个大西洋省份,在其他各省ACCIDENT BENEFIT都是基于无过错原则的 (No-Fault Plan),即你只向你自己的保险公司索偿,其赔偿额度不受你在事故是否有过错或过错多少影响,但禁止向对方或对方的保险公司索偿,除非是就收入损失,或健康护理,或痛苦和(精神)伤害(Suffering and Pain)索赔并满足一定的条件(例外:在PQ这些权利被彻底禁止,作为“回报”,在PQ意外赔偿内容和额度被大大的丰富和提高),而这个条件相信DX们都不愿去满足,比如对痛苦和(精神)伤害 (Suffering and Pain),条件是失去双臂一下肢和一臂,或双目失明,或瘫痪,或植物人。。。
    3. 直接物质赔偿(Direct Compensation – Physical Damage):
    这好象是DX们关心的重点,同时也是误解颇多的地方。这个保险有NO-FAULT的概念在里面,但绝对不是NO-FAULT PLAN。It’s an iverse说它有NO-FAULT的概念,是因为被报险人同样都只跟自己的保险公司打交道,但要在此保险下使自己的保险公司对自己的车辆作出赔偿,一定要先满足两个条件:1)事故涉及一辆或一辆以上对方车辆,且对方车辆也有保险,否则参看下文4 - Uninsured or Unidentified Motorist;如无任何对方车辆涉及,比如自己开车撞电线杆或车辆被盗,属下文之Own Damage - 自己财产损失;2)对方车辆对事故负或部分负责,既要判定责任谁属以及程度%。
    举例1:
    举例2:
    4. Uninsured or Unidentified Motorist

    3)选择保险:自己财产损失更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • 好!, 还有二三吗?
      • 透口气. 下文待续.
    • 好文!请继续!!
    • good, thx
    • to be continued! 3q!
      • 汽车保险浅谈 (2)
        本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛(向一架正在降落的飞机行了会儿注目礼后,接着谈直接物质赔偿DC-PD)

        DC-PD其实是一项责任保险,基于上文谈过的疏忽/过错责任,但经过立法修改,它变成了一个“内转”的索赔,即被保险人不是向有过错的第三方索赔,而是转向自己的保险公司索赔,仿佛自己的保险公司就是那个应负责任的第三方,而可以得到的赔偿是以自己不负责任的那部分为限(是否比较拗口?请参照英文:It is an inverse liability where insured shall claim against his own insurer, as if the insurer is the liable third party, to the extent that he’s not responsible)。看个例子吧:

        举例1:关公开车在公路上撞了秦琼的车,关公的车辆损失加租车费用共2000,秦琼损失1000,双方在事故中都有责任,事后判定关公应负40%责任,而秦琼应负60%责任,暂不考虑免赔额,在DC-PD下,关公可以从自己的保险公司A处得到2000 X 60% = 1200,同理秦琼可在DC-PD下从自己的保险公司B处获得1000 X 40% = 400。关公和秦琼之间的索赔,以及保险公司A与B之间的索赔都被禁止。在这个例子中,如果关公或秦琼都没有买非强制的车辆碰撞保险(Collision,见下文之OWN DAMAGE),1200和400就是他们各自可以得到数额。

        举例2:上例中假设关公够有头脑,宁可多花一点买了另外非强制的车辆碰撞保险,并有免赔额300,他可以就另外800元损失在COLLISION下,而非DC-PD下,从自己的保险公司A处得到800 — 300 X 40% = 680,这是所谓自己的财产损失(OWN DAMAGE)。共计得到赔偿1880,自己付出120,及因为有过错而相应要付那部分免赔额。

        4. Uninsured or Unidentified Motorist
        尽管有这样那样的立法和严厉打击,每天天仍然有人开无保险的车辆,不论是有意还是无意 —比如你借别人的车开,但不知道原来这辆车没有保险。前面提到在DC-PD中有一个必要条件,即涉及事故的车辆双方(或以上)都要有被确认可的汽车保险,否则不能在DC-PD下获得赔偿,而要在Uninsured or Unidentified Motorist下索赔,这包括HIT-AND-RUN的情况,因为一个Unidentified的驾驶员实际上等同于一个 Uninsured驾驶员。受伤害的一方可以向自己的保险公司就ACCIDENT BEBEFITS和物质损失提出赔偿要求,但和前面的谈过的不同,不但物质损失只限于对方应负责的部分,ACCIDENT BENEFITS也只限于对方应负责的部分,且两项的赔偿总额不会超过各省所立法要求的最低额度,上文提到,在ONTARIO,这个额度是200,000。若两项之和超过200,000时,这个额度会按特定的比例在ACCIDENT BENEFITS和物质损失之间摊分。又,物质赔偿的上限是为25,000,免赔额300。

        3) 选择保险项:自己的财产损失(OWN DAMAGE)
        4) ACCIDENT BENEFITS的内容:
        5) 被保险人的定义:
        6) 其他:更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
        • 根据例2,如果买了COLLISION,发生了事故,且自己无过错,那么就可从自己的保险公司得到全额赔偿,而不管保险合同中COLLISION是否有免赔额。不知我这个理解对不对?
          • That's right. However, I believe they won't cover any depreciation and hidden damages remaining on your car. So you still have to consider yourself unlucky. See my post below.
            • 谢! 同意. 不过俺觉得贬值和HIDDEN DAMAGE可操作性似乎不太强.
          • 是. 你的例子中, 在DC-PD下: PAYMENT = LOSS - DEDUCTILBE X 0%
            • 谢!另有一问:ROLIA上有人说过,他的车停在路边,被HIT AND RUN,保险公司赔他的时候,有免赔额。这应该怎么理解呢?
              • 那些东西还没写完, 没大段的时间去写, 不然可能不会有此疑问
                仅以ONTARIO的情况说明, 他省的做法不太清楚: 上贴的计算是基于两车相撞, 且双方都有保险, 适用DC-PD. 对于HIT-AND-RUN, 你不知是谁干的, 要分两种情况: 1)人身伤害, 要在UNINSURED MOTORIST下来索赔, 2) 对于车辆及其他损失, 要在OWN DAMAGE 下处理, 所以一定有免赔.
                • 你, 你, 你 --- 太专业了! 佩服佩服!
            • 今天头有点晕, 刚反映过来, 如果自己没责任, DC-PD就能搞定自己的损失, 不需COLLISION. 那么DC-PD和Uninsured or Unidentified Motorist 有没有免赔额供消费者选择呢?
    • 这样的胡侃实在太好了。严重感谢!!
    • Thanks a lot for your information. Could you please answer a couple of questions.
      I have a couple of specific questions. I was involved in an accident, 100% not at fault. The insurance company arranged with a repair shop to get the car fixed after their appraisal. Is there anything not right in this picture? First, the car will depreciate in thousands of dollars because of the accident. Anybody can obtain the collision record before they buy the car. Second, even if it's repaired in the best shop, the car can never be as good as it is before the accident. There are probably hidden damages remaining on the car that may cause problems and incur considerable repair costs in the future.
      I believe if the collision is totally not my fault, the insurance company should cover me in a way that it will not cause me any financial losses and inconveniences. I understand we are not living in an ideal world. However, I still think it's quite unfair if they won't cover any depreciations and hidden damages to the car. What do you think?
      • You are JUST a policy number to an insurer and they are in a business of generating profits. So as you said, in a realistic world, this won't happen.
        • So it's better if the estimated costs of repair is greater than the market value of the car, so the insurer will write it off and give you a check instead?
          Do you think these two ways of treatment is unfair by themselves? Who have the similar experience?
          • Well, budy, that's how auto insurance works....
      • I guess you mixed up two things: Actual Cash Value (ACV), i.e. Replacement value minus depreciation, and Market Value, i.e. the value it worth when it is reselled.
        According to policy condition, insurer will pay you the Actual Cash Value of the automobile or its parts, but in no event shall the payment exceed the actual cost to be incurred to repair or rebuild it. That's why there's always a depreciation.
        However, ACV is not the same as Market value, which will be materilsed only when you try to sell it , although in some case market value may be used to determine ACV. Aslo, It's noy unusual for us to see a customised car, which, may worth only $1000 itself in ACV, but has a high-profile stereo of $4000 installed inside. Are you expecting the insurer to pay you $5000, becasue of this? That's not right.
        • What I am saying is: If there was not such an accident, I could sell my car today for $10,000.
          After the accident, even the insurer authorize the repair of the apparent body damages. No one is willing to pay more than $8000 for it, because anyone can obtain the record of that vehicle and know it has been involved in a major accident. If the insurer believes the cost of repair is greater than $10,000, they will instead send me a check for $10,000 and write off the car, so I don't have to suffer the >$2,000 loss myself. That's what I consider unfair. Thanks a lot for your answer!
        • I have a very basic car. So you can consider ACV=Market value
      • If you had bought the "depreciation waver", you might be paid back the whole value of your car= what you have paid for. So, for cars not older than 3 years, it is a good idea to by "depreciation waver".
        Lots of guys don't know that.
        • Good point. There are other very good endorsements which I strongly recommend DXs to consider.
          I don't think it will entail a hugh additional premium. Maybe I should cover it later in a separate section.
          • Good, Carry on!
          • You have done a good job. But if you can use some more plain Chinese, less technical terms, we will all be benefited. That should be "waiver" not "waver" by the way--my mistake.
        • but how about for car more than 3 years old?
          and another point is you have to proof what you paid for the car? that may be very high or very low, if you buying from private sell... so how to make it work?
    • 请问DX:夫妻两人中一个人有全科证书,另外的那儿还需要拿个全科证书吗?如果两个人都有全科证书是否保险费会更低?
      • 一个人有就可以
        • 一个人有全科证书,并且以这个人的名义买车,如果另一个也要开这辆车,他没有全科证书,保险公司会长保险费吗?
          • 到monnex去quote一下http://www.tdcanadatrust.com/tdinsurance/auto/quote.jsp 没问题的
            • 我去quote过了,在线的不行,一定要寄表格.
          • yes, a friend's insurance change from82 to 95 after he adder his wife to be second driver(no safety certificate)
            • 什么意思呀?到底老婆用不用也办全科证书呀?
    • 为pat鼓掌!
      • 非常好,虽然把我看糊涂了
    • 鼓掌! 汽车保险真是复杂. 为你助兴, 把以前的一个铁自找出来了