Plaintiff: Zhao

   Defendant: an insurance company.    

   Zhao and some insurance companies have signed a motor vehicle insurance, the insurance types are: loss of vehicle insurance, third party liability insurance, pilfer, irrespective of percentage warranties, excluding the deductible clause. In February 6, 2007 3, Zhao driving cars, along national highway 310 from west to east to the Lankao County super inspection station in front of the section, due to take evasive action into the same direction running in front of large trucks, truck did not stop to navigate away from the scene, Zhao the damage of the vehicle can not run. After the accident, Zhao immediately to the traffic control department of the public security and some insurance companies reported, two units were issued "certificate" and "motor vehicle insurance accident scene survey records" to be confirmed. After the repair, repair costs, supporting the fare value totaling 54606 yuan, 350 yuan. But to an insurance company is "no third party" on the grounds, only claim indemnity of 70% meter 337979.2 yuan, deductible claims 30% meter 16276.8 yuan.

   We as the plaintiff agents, according to the provisions of the facts and the law case, put forward the following opinions agent:

   1, the original defendant signed the motor vehicle insurance and irrespective of percentage warranties, excluding the deductible clause, the defendant to the plaintiff loss of motor vehicle full compensation.Irrespective of percentage clause provides that: "the special agreement, after insurance accident happens, shall be calculated in accordance with the provisions of the franchise clause corresponds to the insured, the insured shall bear the deductible amount, the insurer is responsible for compensation." So the defendant should bear full liability.

   2,Irrespective of the first clause of the odds, liability for compensation shall not absolve the defendant should bear in accordance with the law, in this case does not conform to the rules. Irrespective of the provisions of paragraph 1 odds clause in the vehicle damage insurance: the third party should be responsible for compensation and cannot find the third party, the insurer shall not be liable for , namely the franchise for the. First, the plaintiff has no obligation to prove that "the third party should be responsible for compensation", also cannot prove the. After the accident, the plaintiff immediately to the public security traffic management department and the insurance companies reported, two units were issued "certificate" and "motor vehicle insurance accident scene survey records" show, large trucks without liability, the plaintiff is full responsibility. In the event the accident compensation, no fault. Secondly, the accused did not provide the "third party should be responsible for compensation" evidence and the reasons to the court, can not prove that the third party liability. In this regard, the defendant bears the burden of proof, should bear the burden of proof can not ignore the consequences.

   3, the plaintiff in the car after the accident has neither the capacity nor the power to restrict the freedom of the person of the third parties, the plaintiff can do is report to the public security traffic management departments and insurance companies in a timely manner, the first paragraph of the irrespective of percentage clause to increase the liability of the insurer, the insured fully assume that "unable to find the third party" consequences clearly unfair. "Contract law of the people's Republic of China" fortieth article: "terms of format with the fifty-second article of this Law and the provisions of article fifty-third cases, or to provide one format articles from its liabilities, increases the liabilities of the other party, excludes the rights of the other party, the terms shall be invalid." Investigators found full responsibility for the plaintiff defendant in this case, namely the third party has no responsibility, but the defendant or the provisions of the franchise, this is the understanding of the standard terms. "Contract law" of the people's Republic of China stipulates that the forty-first "controversy: the understanding of the standard terms occurs, it shall be interpreted according to general understanding. There are two more on the interpretation of terms of format, shall make a decision not to provide an explanation of terms of format. Inconsistent format clause and non format terms, shall adopt the non format terms."

   4, the plaintiff did not receive indemnity.

The two sides have reached a preliminary to the settlement agreement, the plaintiff has accepted the insurance money for defense, cannot be established. The fact is, the plaintiff from know deductible 30% insurance gold to express their opposition, until now has not received a penny in insurance, obviously the defendant has no evidence. In short, the defendant should bear the liability for the agreed 100% according to the contract, 30% no legal basis for the insurance deductible.

   Ultimately the court did not support the plaintiff's claim. At present, the insurance industry is in a very strong position, unfair, increases the liabilities of the other party case exists in the format of the contract will be not at all surprising. This situation improved, not only need to have laws and regulations more perfect, to further improve and further, also need to know the society so, don't expect a case can change the status quo. However, if a similar cases are more and more, will cause the legal profession and the insurance industry seriously, there are forces helped change the insurer and the insured, the realization of the justice of social philosophy. With the entry of foreign insurance companies, domestic counterparts in the increasingly fierce competition, the development of the insurance industry has entered the risks and opportunities of the times, the industry can hardly be avoided. At present, people generally lack of confidence in the domestic insurance companies, insurance companies in the insurance that speak in superlatives, payments. Even heap curses on , all insured, caused by the slowdown, the development of the insurance industry was very bad. But personally, dare to challenge the insurance giant, dares to the insurance clauses not legitimate to say no, the use of legal weapons to protect their own interests, courage, glorious defeat. personal power although small, but should see the legal system, Chinese process, has many small because of individual cases and accelerate the , its influence is very far-reaching. Here, we also for those stubborn and tough legal warriors to express my sincere respect.