On the 21st, "Morning News"
Car owners question why car insurance claims are so difficult?
[Introduction]
The elderly couple Li Xingmin and Hu Xianwen from Kunming are victims of this tyrannical clause. Both are over 60 years old. After retirement, the two elders bought a car to enjoy a peaceful and happy life in their later years. However, an insurance rejection case shattered the elder's beautiful plans. In June 2010, the elderly Mr. Li drove his beloved car with his wife back to their hometown in Sichuan for a family visit. On the way back, they were rear-ended by a large truck. The traffic police determined that the large truck was fully responsible, and the elderly Mr. Li had no responsibility. Due to severe vehicle damage, the elderly man reported the incident to the police immediately and also notified his own insurance company.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
The insurance company came, and so did the traffic police. In the end, because this matter was the other party's responsibility, (the insurance company believed) it had nothing to do with them, so they left. Therefore, I felt very strange. I have no responsibility, yet the insurance company doesn't care. What is the point of my insurance then?
At the same time as the elderly Mr. Li informed his insurance company, the driver of the offending large truck also notified his own insurance company. After investigating the scene, the offending party's insurance company had no objections to the accident but set the damage assessment amount at fifty-one thousand yuan. However, no repair shop was willing to undertake the repairs at such a low price.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
If fifty-one thousand yuan can fix it, as long as the car is repaired, my purpose is achieved, and I don't care about the rest. But they won't even look for a repair shop, nor can they find one where fifty-one thousand yuan would be enough.
Mr. Li's insurance company claimed that since Mr. Li was not at fault, they would not handle the claim. Meanwhile, the opposing party's insurance company said that the repair shop's quote was too high and refused to handle it as well. Mr. Li found himself in a helpless situation.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
In the end, I had no choice but to go to the provincial judicial appraisal center for an appraisal to determine how much it would cost to repair my car. After the judicial center arrived, I paid four thousand yuan for the appraisal fee. They hired experts who examined it, and finally, it was determined that it would cost eighty-eight thousand yuan to repair. That is, if something should be replaced, it will be replaced; if it can be repaired, it will be repaired. Under these circumstances, the price was brought down to eighty-six thousand yuan, and the car was repaired. However, neither of the two insurance companies cared, and in the end, I had to take the car out myself up until now.
Mr. Li repaired his car according to the pricing provided by the judicial appraisal center, trying to minimize the repair costs as much as possible. However, both insurance companies refused to compensate him, leaving the elderly man to pay the repair costs himself. Despite paying the money, the elderly man felt deeply wronged.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
So what is the main role of insurance? For people like us who drive cautiously and lawfully, we deserve protection when accidents happen. But they just ignore it.
The elderly man decided to file a lawsuit to seek justice for himself.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
Only through legal procedures can I claim compensation from the insurance company. Regardless of which insurance company compensates me, as long as I get reimbursed, it is not my accident responsibility. Ultimately, there must be one company that compensates me. So I feel that since 2007, for three years, I have paid three or four thousand yuan annually for insurance premiums, and up until now, the insurance company has ignored me.
[Concurrent] Customer Service of Yunnan Branch of Ping An Property Insurance Company of China
If two cars collide in an accident and your car is not at fault, you do not need to involve your insurance company. You only need to contact the other party's insurance company.
The insurance company's response mainly relies on this clause. The clause explicitly states: If the insured vehicle is involved in a road traffic accident, our company will bear the corresponding compensation liability based on the proportion of responsibility the driver has in the traffic accident. If the insured vehicle has no accident responsibility, our company will not bear the compensation liability.
[Concurrent] Lawyer Zhang Honglei representing Mr. Li Xingmin
"No compensation for no responsibility" is illegal whether from a legal perspective, an insurance contract, or the principle of standard contracts. It is a tyrannical clause that reduces the insurance company's liability and increases the policyholder's obligations. According to the provisions of our country's Contract Law and Insurance Law, it is a typical invalid clause.
"No Compensation for No Responsibility" - A Small but Concealed Clause
[Introduction]
In our general understanding, the protective role of insurance should be like this: for example, if we purchase personal accident insurance and an accident occurs, the insurance company that collected the premium must compensate. However, in car insurance, according to the "no compensation for no responsibility" clause, even if you insure your car, after an accident causing vehicle damage, you may not receive any protection from the insurance company that collected your premium. Precisely due to this so-called "wonderful function," insurance companies have gone to great lengths to hide this "tyrannical clause" in the contract.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
When we buy insurance, they never remind us about this matter. Moreover, being older people, we tend to buy more insurance.
The lawyer pointed out that not only is the font size incredibly small, but the position of the "pay according to responsibility" and "no compensation for no responsibility" clauses in the contract is also thought-provoking.
[Concurrent] Lawyer Zhang Honglei representing Mr. Li Xingmin
From the form of the insurance contract, "no compensation for no responsibility" is a typical exemption clause. According to the Insurance Law, the exemption clause must be clearly indicated to consumers. However, in all car insurance clauses of insurance companies nationwide, the "no compensation for no responsibility" clause does not appear under the exemption clause section but rather under the compensation handling section. That is, if it is an exemption, why don't you openly write it under the exemption matters of the contract? From this point, we believe this clause is a very dark and insidious fraudulent act. I can say that "no compensation for no responsibility" is already a trap clause in terms of its position and form in the contract, deliberately making consumers unaware of the possibility of "no compensation for no responsibility."
According to experts, there are currently around two hundred million motor vehicles in our country, and the vast majority of car owners choose automobile insurance consumption. Vehicle loss insurance is one of the main types of automobile insurance. In fact, vehicle losses in accidents are either due to one's own responsibility or someone else's responsibility. The "pay according to responsibility" and "no compensation for no responsibility" clauses exclude the possibility of compensation when the responsibility lies with others, thus excluding a significant portion of the coverage of this type of insurance. That is to say, this clause is a crucial one, and precisely because of its importance, insurance companies use various methods to retain this clause while trying not to attract consumer attention.
Final Remarks
[Oral Broadcast]
We focus on the topic of tyrannical clauses every year, but similar tyrannical clauses continue to exist despite prohibitions and keep emerging. We hope that relevant departments will take action, and consumers should also resolutely oppose tyrannical clauses using legal weapons.
On the 21st, "News Thirty Minutes"
Why does the "no compensation for no responsibility" clause remain hidden?
[Introduction]
After retirement, the elderly couple Li Xingmin and Hu Xianwen from Kunming bought a car. Last June, the elderly Mr. Li drove his wife back to their hometown in Sichuan for a family visit. On the way back, they were rear-ended by a large truck. The traffic police determined that the large truck was fully responsible.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
The insurance company came, and so did the traffic police. In the end, because this matter was the other party's responsibility, (the insurance company believed) it had nothing to do with them, so they left. Therefore, I felt very strange.
The driver of the offending large truck also notified his own insurance company. After the investigation by the offending party's insurance company, the damage assessment amount was set at fifty-one thousand yuan. However, no repair shop was willing to undertake the repairs at such a low price. The elderly Mr. Li found himself in a helpless situation.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
In the end, I had no choice but to go to the provincial judicial appraisal center for an appraisal to determine how much it would cost to repair my car. After the judicial center arrived, I paid four thousand yuan for the appraisal fee. Finally, the car was repaired for eighty-six thousand yuan, but neither of the two insurance companies cared.
[Concurrent] Customer Service of Yunnan Branch of Ping An Property Insurance Company of China
If two cars collide in an accident and your car is not at fault, you do not need to involve your insurance company. You only need to contact the other party's insurance company.
The basis for the insurance company's statement is the "pay according to responsibility" clause in the car insurance contract. This clause stipulates: If the insured vehicle has no accident responsibility, our company will not bear the compensation responsibility.
[Concurrent] Lawyer Zhang Honglei representing Mr. Li Xingmin
"No compensation for no responsibility" is illegal whether from a legal perspective, an insurance contract, or the principle of standard contracts. It is a tyrannical clause that reduces the insurance company's liability and increases the policyholder's obligations. According to the provisions of our country's Contract Law and Insurance Law, it is a typical invalid clause.
[Concurrent] Car owner Li Xingmin
When we buy insurance, they never remind us about this matter.
The lawyer pointed out that not only is the font size too small to see clearly, but the position of the "no compensation for no responsibility" clause in the contract is also thought-provoking.
[Concurrent] Lawyer Zhang Honglei representing Mr. Li Xingmin
According to the Insurance Law, the exemption clause must be clearly indicated to consumers. However, in all car insurance clauses of insurance companies nationwide, the "no compensation for no responsibility" clause does not appear under the exemption clause section but rather under the compensation handling section. That is, if it is an exemption, why don't you openly write it under the exemption matters of the contract? From this point, we believe this clause is a very dark and insidious fraudulent act.
[Broadcaster Comment] "No compensation for no responsibility" has become an industry norm in car insurance.
[Oral Broadcast]