Brief introduction of details of a case
2013, qiu Mou is cast protect car to trace remaining part, be maintained complete duty, repair cost more than yuan 50 thousand. Insurance company with doing yearly check rejecting claims. Qiu Mou weighs insurance contract is wife king some autograph, the inscribe on disclaimer statement does not have date, cannot prove to casting lot of the place before protecting, reason should be maintained did not explain clearly to disclaimer.
Forensic cognizance thinks
1, Wang Mou of Qiu Mou wife signs on insurance application, for its the family is in insurance company place to deal with relevant insurance formalities with the car, should maintain for its exercise housekeeping dealership. Insurance contract agrees, motor-car of the safety when producing insurance accident did not examine by the regulation or examine unqualified, no matter any losses that any reasons cause safety motor-car and charge, insurance average per capita is not in charge of compensating for, this clause fastens underwriter responsibility to exempt an item. Qiu Mou fastens insurant, enjoy insurance benefit, wang Mou of Qiu some wife is in autograph in statement of the policy-holder on insurance application, explain its are opposite especially to clauses absolve part of underwriter liability clause to content already understood and give accept. The clew that can confirm insurance company fulfilled responsibility to exempt an item to Wang Mou from this shows obligation. Insurance company serves as an underwriter, fulfill responsibility to absolve what explain clearly to tell obligation to Wang Mou, wang Mou is in inform name of the Qiu Mou on the autograph on the book to try to affirm, should avoid duty inform effectiveness and Yu Qiu some. Qiu Mou is in two years during cast to insurance company in all protect twice, of this and insurance company allegation every are cast protect the operation that performs clear specification obligation to be used to be identical, and Qiu Mou absolves clear manual to sign time to cannot make logical explanation to two responsibility, the clear specification that during reason maintains experience case to be sure, insurance company all already went to disclaimer to policy-holder is compulsory.
2, to make sure road transportation is safe, car should undertake safe technology examines regularly, it is well-known common sense, this responsibility exempts an item in the insurance contract between Qiu Mou and insurance company the agreement is not lawbreaking prohibit sexual regulation, should be effective, all have sanction to Qiu Mou and insurance company both sides. The court decision rejects Qiu Mou appeal.
Solid Wu wants a place
The spouse is cast for you as agent when protecting, the underwriter undertakes clew with respect to disclaimer to this agent and make clear specification, disclaimer produces legal effectiveness to policy-holder.
