Effect of -- and test drive agreement

Lee to 4S shop to buy a brand car, in the test drive Lee driving test drive with Zhao driving trucks collided, the vehicle has the varying degree damage, Li and Zhao injured in hospital, the 4S store sales staff sit in to try to drive the auxiliary seat, also injured in hospital. The traffic police department issued a "book" that the responsibility of traffic accident identification, Li and Zhao bear equal responsibility. Lee in the vehicle for a test drive before, 4S stores the signed a "test drive agreement", agreed to drive people Lee in by strictly abide by traffic regulations test drive the process, subject to the 4S store instructions according to the prescribed route, try our best to protect the test drive the vehicle safely and in good condition, otherwise, test drive Lee commit to 4S shops and vehicles, personnel of all related losses.

After the accident, 4S shop asked Li and Zhao on the vehicle and the sales staff personal damages, and asked Li and Zhao joint responsibility. Zhao asked 4S to store and Lee compensatory body loss of its vehicles and people, Li Mouze asked the 4S to store and Zhao compensation for personal damage. 4S stores and vehicle insurance company, Zhao and vehicle insurance company, Lee fruitless negotiations, respectively, to the court, claim compensation for the losses.

The case involves complex legal relationship, contract, insurance contract, tort, joint tort injury claims, etc.. The author only in this case the 4S shop claims a thing to be on.

In the 4S shop v. Li and Zhao and its claim with the insurance company in the case, the court found, Lee has four years of driving experience, driving experience. In the drive before, after the 4S store sales staff to explain to the vehicle performance, operation and driving route, Lee in the test drive, test drive the process, has been made by Lee operating vehicle. Because Lee at an illegal U-turn, Zhao excessive speed caused the collision between two cars. Effect of the focus of controversy in this case focused on "test drive agreement" and Lee and 4S shop responsible.

Effect of "test drive agreement", there are two opinions. The first view, as consumers, in the test drive vehicles, Lee the actual control of the vehicle, which belongs to the actual use of vehicles. In accordance with the "tort liability law" article forty-ninth, "by motor vehicle leasing, borrowing situation all people and use are not the same person, after a traffic accident belongs to the motor vehicle party responsibility, the insurance company shall make compensation in motor vehicle compulsory insurance liability limit. Part of the problem, by the user of the motor vehicle shall bear the responsibility for compensation; the owner of the vehicle is at fault for the damage, assume corresponding responsibility for compensation." 4S shop in the review of driver's license, driving Lee before determining the qualification and ability of safe driving of motor vehicles, and no vehicle security flaws, obvious for operation, 4S stores have no fault. After consultations between the two sides, Lee signed a "test drive agreement" behavior belongs to the voluntary behavior, should recognize its effect. The occurrence of traffic accidents and Li Mouyou direct causal relationship, the liability for compensation Lee as the motor vehicle driver shall bear the damage caused by the accident. The insurance company Zhao vehicle insured in insurance liability limits to compensation, the insufficient part by Lee shared with Zhao according to accident responsibility to.

The second view, as in the case of traffic accidents in the drive, and should be distinguished from ordinary traffic accident treatment. The 4S store as a test drive activity organizer, acquire potential customers to promote sales of vehicles, held a test drive activities, to obtain commercial interests; the control performance Li Mouze experience on test drive the vehicle and intuitive feel, gain, also in this process. 4S stores provide "test drive agreement" agreed in the process of driving, causing casualties and property losses shall be responsible for the test drive, from their own responsibility, excludes the rights of the other party, the terms of format, should be recognized as invalid. 4S shop provides the test drive route, the sales staff to deal with Lee's driving behavior should be supervised and remind. Lee and 4S shop joint control, control in the case of vehicles, and obtain their own interests, so by Lee, 4S shop together to try to drive a responsibility. That is beyond liability compulsory insurance liability limit part of the loss, by Zhao bear half, the other half by the Lee shared with the 4S store.
　 The author thinks, 4S shop test drive, to obtain commercial interests, but also to enable consumers to performance, operation on vehicles with intuitive understanding, both sides benefit from. 4S shop as the vehicle management and industry standard of the participants, activities in the test drive should bear administrative responsibility and duty of care, such as to review the qualifications and ability of consumers, for consumers and the safety of the vehicle to a duty of care, such as a detailed description on vehicle performance, in the drive before, so that consumers are familiar with the vehicle after the vehicle on the road; try to choose good roads, vehicles less safe section as a test region; on the test drive route on customer notes, reminders of test to note, in the test drive the process, the operation supervision and reminders, to prevent and reduce the occurrence of the risk. After all, consumers buy before the models are not familiar with the 4S store, allowing it to drive is not familiar with the performance of vehicles on the road, be responsible for the 4 shop. 4S shop to do not have a duty of care, the accident loss, from the 4S store and drive people assume their respective responsibilities and obligations. 4S stores to do the duty of care, not because consumers are not familiar with the traffic accident, only the losses caused by the consumer's own fault, no liability shall be determined by the 4S store, drive people bear the obligation of reparation. "Test drive agreement" as 4S stores and consumers agreed test notes and risk taking the agreement, both sides as equal subjects, to carry out the punishment of civil rights, should not be simply considered as terms of format and then all the requirements of 4S shop and drive consumers share the compensation responsibility. The author believes that, in this case 4S shop to make management and duty of care, because Lee violated the "road traffic safety law" behavior caused by traffic accidents caused by vehicles, personal loss, the insurance company paid after the insufficient part, Mr. Li should be used as people assume corresponding responsibilities, compensation 4S shop test drive vehicles and staff loss.