Penalty under compulsory motor liability insurance - calculation, calculation formula, law, judicial practice

Despite the fact that liability insurance for vehicle owners is a prerequisite for their use, the parties draw up an agreement. It is its existence that makes it possible to apply to the violator the norms of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation regarding liability for failure to comply with the terms of the agreement.

Dear readers! The article talks about typical ways to resolve legal issues, but each case is individual. If you want to find out how to solve your particular problem , contact a consultant:

+7 (499) 938-81-90 (Moscow)

+7 (812) 467-32-77 (Saint Petersburg)

8 (800) 301-79-36 (Regions)

APPLICATIONS AND CALLS ARE ACCEPTED 24/7 and 7 days a week.

It's fast and FREE !

We are talking about penalties, fines and penalties as the main types of civil liability. All this does not cancel the existing administrative liability for evading the issuance of compulsory motor liability insurance or delaying the policy or period of use.

What is a penalty under compulsory motor liability insurance?

OSAGO is an agreement between the owner of the vehicle and the insurance company. In this type of relationship, the penalty applies only to one party to the contract - the insurer.

If the insurance company does not fulfill its obligations (does not make payments, delays payment or repair), for each day of delay it is obliged to pay a penalty, which is calculated according to a certain formula.

A conflict with an insurance company can be resolved without going to court; if pre-trial proceedings do not help, feel free to go to court.

Grounds for payment of a penalty

There are several grounds for claiming a penalty:

The insurance payment deadline has been violated
The deadline for the return of the insurance premium has been violated
Illegal refusal to pay insurance
Payment was not made in full
The deadlines for repair work were violated

Case N78-КГ16-58. On the collection of penalties, compensation for moral damage, and fines.

Laws and codes » Federal Law No. 40 “On compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners” dated 04/25/2002 » Chapter II. Conditions and procedure for compulsory insurance » Article 13. Repealed » Case N78-КГ16-58. On the collection of penalties, compensation for moral damage, and fines. SUPREME COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

DEFINITION

dated November 29, 2021 N 78-KG16-58

Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, consisting of

Chairman Gorshkov V.V.,

judges Romanovsky S.V. and Getman E.S.,

having considered in open court the case on the claim of Knyazeva A.S. to the limited liability company "Rosgosstrakh" for the recovery of penalties, fines, and compensation for moral damages

on the cassation appeal of the representative Knyazeva A.S. on the decision of the Primorsky District Court of St. Petersburg dated October 19, 2015 and the appeal ruling of the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court dated January 26, 2016,

after hearing the report of the judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.V. Romanovsky, after hearing representatives of A.S. Knyazeva Shelyapina P.V. and Matsedonsky D.M.,

installed:

Knyazeva A.S. filed a lawsuit against Rosgosstrakh LLC (hereinafter referred to as the company) for the recovery of a penalty for payment of insurance compensation in an incomplete amount, compensation for moral damage, a fine, as well as legal costs.

In support of her claims, the plaintiff indicated that on January 24, 2015, a traffic accident occurred, as a result of which mechanical damage was caused to her “<…>” car. The civil liability of Knyazeva A.S., as the owner of the vehicle, is insured by the company under the MTPL agreement dated December 8, 2014, the civil liability of Polyakova S.A., who is guilty of the accident, was insured on August 14, 2014.

Fulfilling its obligations under the MTPL agreement, the company inspected the vehicle on February 28, 2015, recognized the case as insured and paid insurance compensation in the amount of 76,500 rubles.

According to the report of an independent appraiser, the amount of costs for the restoration of the vehicle, taking into account wear and tear, amounted to 145,949 rubles.

On June 22, 2015, the plaintiff filed a claim with the company for additional payment of insurance compensation in the amount of 43,500 rubles, reimbursement of expenses for an independent examination in the amount of 4,000 rubles, payment of compensation for moral damage in the amount of 11,000 rubles, reimbursement of expenses for notary services in in the amount of 1,900 rubles.

On June 26, 2015, the defendant, satisfying the claim, made an additional payment of insurance compensation in the amount of 43,500 rubles. up to the amount of 120,000 rubles.

Due to the untimely payment of insurance compensation in full, the plaintiff asked the court to recover from the company a penalty in the amount of 51,765 rubles, a fine, compensation for moral damage, and legal costs.

By the decision of the Primorsky District Court of St. Petersburg dated October 19, 2015, upheld by the appeal ruling of the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court dated January 26, 2021, the claim was denied.

In the cassation appeal, representative Knyazeva A.S. asks to cancel these judicial acts.

By the ruling of the judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.V. Romanovsky. dated October 12, 2021, the cassation appeal with the case was transferred for consideration at a court hearing of the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.

Having checked the case materials, discussed the arguments of the cassation appeal, explanations regarding the cassation appeal, the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation finds the complaint subject to satisfaction.

In accordance with Article 387 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the grounds for canceling or changing court decisions in cassation are significant violations of substantive law or procedural law that influenced the outcome of the case and without eliminating which it is impossible to restore and protect violated rights, freedoms and legal interests, as well as protection of public interests protected by law.

Such violations of the law were committed by the courts when considering this case.

The court found that on December 8, 2014, an agreement on compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners was concluded between the parties.

The MTPL contract for Polyakova S.A., guilty of causing harm, was concluded on August 14, 2014.

On January 24, 2015, an accident occurred in which the plaintiff’s car was damaged, and therefore on January 29, 2015, she applied to the company for direct compensation for losses.

The insurer recognized the specified event as an insured event and on February 28, 2015 made a payment in the amount of 76,500 rubles.

Knyazeva A.S., disagreeing with the amount of insurance compensation, on June 22, 2015, filed a claim with the defendant, in which she asked for payment in full.

On June 26, 2015, the company made an additional payment of insurance compensation in the amount of 43,500 rubles.

Resolving the dispute and refusing to satisfy the claims, the court of first instance proceeded from the fact that the plaintiff did not prove the fact of improper performance by the defendant of the obligations provided for in the compulsory insurance agreement, since after the appeal of Knyazeva A.S. with the claim dated June 22, 2015, the company made an additional payment of insurance compensation in the amount of 43,500 rubles, and therefore there are no grounds for applying a civil sanction in the form of a penalty. The claim for compensation for moral damage was rejected because the court did not establish violations of the plaintiff’s rights by the company.

The appellate court agreed with these conclusions, indicating that the obligation to pay insurance compensation was fulfilled by the company in full. In addition, it was stated that the plaintiff abused her rights, since she independently assessed the damage in January 2015, and applied for additional payment of insurance compensation only in June 2015, demanding payment of a penalty for the specified period.

The Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation finds that the above conclusions of the courts are based on the incorrect application of substantive law.

According to Article 309 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, obligations must be fulfilled properly in accordance with the terms of the obligation and the requirements of the law, other legal acts, and in the absence of such conditions and requirements - in accordance with business customs or other usually imposed requirements.

By virtue of paragraph 1 of Article 330 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a penalty (fine, penalty) is a sum of money determined by law or contract that the debtor is obliged to pay to the creditor in the event of non-fulfillment or improper fulfillment of an obligation, in particular in the case of delay in fulfillment. Upon a claim for payment of a penalty, the creditor is not required to prove that he suffered losses.

In accordance with paragraphs one and two of paragraph 2 of Article 13 of the Federal Law of April 25, 2002 N 40 - Federal Law “On compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners” (hereinafter referred to as the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance) as amended in force until September 1, 2014. , the insurer considers the victim’s application for insurance payment and the documents attached to it provided for by the rules of compulsory insurance within 30 days from the date of receipt. During the specified period, the insurer is obliged to make an insurance payment to the victim or send him a reasoned refusal to make such payment.

If this obligation is not fulfilled, the insurer, for each day of delay, pays the victim a forfeit (penalty) in the amount of one seventy-fifth of the refinancing rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, valid on the day when the insurer should have fulfilled this obligation, from the insured amount established by Article 7 of this Federal Law by type compensation for harm to each victim.

By virtue of paragraph eleven of Article 1 of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance, under a contract of compulsory civil liability insurance, the insured is the risk of civil liability during the operation of a specific vehicle, therefore, in the event of an insured event, insurance compensation is provided by the insurer who insured the civil liability of the victim (i.e. in the form of direct compensation damage in accordance with Article 14.1 of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance), and by the insurer who insured the civil liability of the person who caused the damage, is carried out in accordance with the terms of the contract of the person at fault in the traffic accident.

Since the liability of the tortfeasor is Polyakova S.A. was insured on August 14, 2014, then when resolving the dispute, it was necessary to proceed from the terms for payment of insurance compensation, as well as those sanctions for late payment, which were established by law at the time of conclusion of the MTPL contract by the guilty party.

At the same time, the fact of the appeal of Knyazeva A.S. to the defendant in direct compensation does not affect the determination of the applicable law.

This conclusion follows from the analysis of paragraph 13 of Article 5 of the Federal Law of July 21, 2014 N 223-FZ “On Amendments to the Federal Law “On Compulsory Insurance of Civil Liability of Vehicle Owners” and certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation” (hereinafter referred to as the Federal Law N 223-FZ), according to which the provisions of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance (as amended by the said Federal Law) apply to relations between victims, policyholders and insurers arising from compulsory insurance contracts for civil liability of vehicle owners, concluded after the entry into force of the relevant provisions of this Federal Law , unless otherwise provided by this article .

A different procedure for applying the provisions of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance (as amended by Federal Law No. 223-FZ of July 21, 2014) on the timing of insurance payments, penalties and financial sanctions is not provided for in Article 5.

In addition, in accordance with the explanations contained in paragraph 44 of the resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 29, 2015 No. 2 “On the application by courts of the legislation on compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners”, the twenty-day period provided for in paragraph 21 of Article 12 of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance consideration by the insurer of the victim’s application for an insured event shall be applied to the relationship between the insurer and the victim arising from compulsory insurance contracts for civil liability of vehicle owners, concluded starting from September 1, 2014.

Considering that the penalty provided for in paragraph 21 of Article 12 of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance is established for violation of the 20-day period, its accrual is possible for legal relations arising from compulsory civil liability insurance contracts concluded starting from September 1, 2014.

In paragraph two of paragraph 55 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated January 29, 2015 No. 2 “On the application by courts of the legislation on compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners” it is explained that the penalty is calculated from the day following the day established for making a decision on payment of insurance compensation, and until the day the insurer actually fulfills its obligations under the contract.

From the circumstances established by the court, it follows that after the plaintiff’s initial application for payment of insurance compensation on January 29, 2015, the insurer did not properly fulfill its obligation within 30 days, since it did not pay the insurance compensation in full.

Taking into account that part of the insurance compensation was paid by the insurer after the expiration of the period established by paragraph 2 of Article 13 of the Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance as amended in force until September 1, 2014, then by virtue of the above legal norms and clarifications of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation in favor of the plaintiff a penalty had to be collected.

Consequently, since the insurer did not pay the amount of insurance compensation in full in a timely manner, then for the delay in fulfilling the obligation, a penalty is subject to collection, which is calculated from the day following the day when the insurer paid the insurance compensation in part, and until the day the insurer actually fulfills the obligation under the contract .

The arguments of the appellate court that the plaintiff, by filing a claim for a penalty, committed an abuse of right because she did not apply for payment of insurance compensation in full for a long time, are not substantiated by references to evidence.

Thus, in support of its position, the court of second instance referred to the fact that on January 30, 2015, the plaintiff applied to the auto expert bureau of AVT-SERVICE LLC to assess the damage caused to the vehicle, and filed an application for additional payment only on June 22, 2015. However, the court did not establish and did not indicate in the judicial act the date of production and receipt by Knyazeva A.S. conclusions from AVT-SERVICE LLC, as well as the reasons why the plaintiff contacted the insurance company only in June 2015.

The question of the presence in the actions of Knyazeva A.S. signs of abuse of rights in violation of Article 56 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation were not brought up for discussion at all among the participants in the process and a court settlement on this circumstance, which the court recognized as legally significant, was not carried out. In this regard, the conclusions of the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court in this part cannot be considered legal and justified.

The appellate court also agreed with the decision of the first instance court to refuse to satisfy the demands of Knyazeva A.S. on the recovery of compensation for moral damages for late payment of insurance compensation.

At the same time, it was not taken into account that, according to Article 15 of the Law of the Russian Federation “On the Protection of Consumer Rights,” moral damages are compensated to the consumer if the fact of violation of his rights is established.

The court established and was not disputed by the defendant that the full amount of insurance compensation was paid to the plaintiff untimely, that is, her rights as a consumer were violated. In this regard, the court’s refusal to collect compensation for moral damage is contrary to the law.

It is also impossible to agree with the court ruling regarding the refusal to satisfy the demands of Knyazeva A.S. to recover the costs of carrying out the examination.

As established by the court and follows from the case materials, the additional amount of insurance compensation was paid by the defendant solely on the basis of the conclusion made by AVT-SERVICE LLC, the costs of which were borne by the plaintiff.

In such circumstances, the court should have been guided by Articles 15 and 1064 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, which involved assessing how much this examination contributed to the restoration of the legal rights of Knyazeva A.S. in case of improper performance of his duties by the defendant.

At the same time, the costs of conducting the examination, as losses of the plaintiff associated with an improper assessment of the damage by the insurance company itself, could not be included in the insurance payment, but were subject to compensation in excess of it.

The violations of substantive law committed by the court of appeal are significant; without their elimination, restoration of the violated rights and legitimate interests of the applicant of the cassation appeal is impossible.

Guided by Articles 387, 388, 390 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, the Judicial Collegium for Civil Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation

determined:

The appeal ruling of the judicial panel for civil cases of the St. Petersburg City Court dated January 26, 2021 is cancelled, and the case is sent for a new trial to the appellate court.

Law on penalties under compulsory motor liability insurance

All relations between the policyholder and the insurer in this case are regulated by several legal acts:

Civil Code of the Russian Federation. It clarifies the concepts of “penalty” and “legal penalty”
Law on insurance in the Russian Federation. This law applies to any type of insurance companies
Law on compulsory motor liability insurance. Here you can find information about the accrual of penalties and their amounts
Federal Law of the Russian Federation No. 223 . Law on changes in legal acts on the calculation of penalties. Valid since 2014.

The main one among these documents is Federal Law No. 40 “On Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance”. This regulatory act considers all the details, both regarding the payment of insurance itself and the accrual of penalties.

According to the law, the deadlines for payment and consideration of claims for an insured event are as follows:

20 calendar days , not counting non-working days and holidays for those whose policy was issued after 01.01. 2014. For those who issued a policy before this date, the period is 30 calendar days . After this period, all due funds must be paid in full.
5 working days for consideration of the policyholder’s application

The deadlines can be changed only if the full package of documents is not provided or if the policyholder does not allow the insurance agent to inspect the vehicle. The deadlines also change if a criminal or administrative investigation is underway.

Arbitrage practice

When the car is under warranty, and the insurer offers to carry out repairs in a private workshop, it is better to receive monetary compensation and refuse services.

The insured person will only bear additional losses if maintenance is not carried out at specialized service stations.

Ordinary workshops cannot provide a guarantee for the full functioning of the car in the event of a breakdown. The personnel and technical equipment of service centers will be the key to long-term operation of the vehicle. This fact is confirmed by judicial practice.

Insurance payments for a warranty vehicle will depend on the pricing policy of the official automobile representative.

Some courts cannot reach a consensus on whether the cost of skilled labor or the price of spare parts should be recovered in the appraisal process. But most take into account the prices of all repairs entirely at the rates specified by official dealers.

New changes to the law on compulsory motor liability insurance establish a mandatory pre-trial procedure for resolving a dispute with an insurer regarding the payment of compensation and new interest rates on penalties for delays in fulfilling obligations. The procedure for submitting claims will be used until the first day of July 2015.

Therefore, many insurers have decided that the rule regarding mandatory filing of claims is used only with contracts that were concluded after the first of September.

The judiciary takes a different position. The judge of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation explained that the procedure for filing claims is mandatory for all claims for insured events that occurred from September 1, 2014 to the last day of June 2015.

The interested party is obliged to file an application for the occurrence of an insured event and then, in pre-trial proceedings, challenge the amount of payment or the procedure for its provision.

Rights and obligations of the insurer

The insurer's responsibilities include:

Inform the policyholder of all insurance rules
Maintaining the confidentiality of data that the policyholder provides to the insurer
Quality control and timing of vehicle repairs. If the repair deadlines are violated or the vehicle has repair defects, the policyholder also has the right to demand a penalty. In this case, the insurer has the right to send the vehicle to have the defect repaired. In this case, the period increases.
Within 20 days from the date of submission of the full package of documents, pay the full insurance amount or give a referral for vehicle repair
Issue a duplicate of the policy if it is lost by the policyholder

Insurer's rights:

When concluding an MTPL agreement, inspect the vehicle
In the event of an accident, order an examination to identify the extent of damage and harm to the health of the insured
Identify on your own the cause of the insured event; to do this, make requests to law enforcement agencies and other organizations that have the necessary information
Demand termination of the insurance contract if the policyholder provided false information about himself
Demand an increase in insurance premiums if the degree of risk has increased
In the event that the insurance company has fully fulfilled its obligations, and the violation of deadlines was not due to their fault (but, for example, due to the fault of the policyholder or force majeure), the insurance company may be exempt from payment
A penalty cannot be collected if the amount and grounds for which are not provided for by law.
The insurer has the right to participate in negotiations with third parties who suffered through the fault of the policyholder to resolve the conflict

Algorithm for calculating the amount of the penalty

The calculation of penalties is stipulated by paragraphs of Federal Law No. 40. According to these provisions, the accrual of delays is carried out according to the formula: Sum insured * Days of delay * 1%. The second formula for calculating penalties is also allowed: (Insured amount – Cash paid by the insurance company) * Days of delay * 1%.

When you need to calculate

a penalty for untimely carrying out repair work, the total amount of reconstruction of the car is taken as a basis, with mandatory consideration of its wear and tear. In this case, the calculation can be made from the full payment. The MTPL penalty is calculated until the compensation is transferred to the policyholder.

It is important to know! The penalty is limited to the maximum remuneration values. It is classified according to the type of damage and is regulated by Part 1 of Article 16 of Federal Law No. 40 of the “Law on Compulsory Motor Liability Insurance”. If the payment is assigned on the basis of injury to health, its size can reach a maximum value of 500 thousand rubles, and in a property dispute - 400 thousand. Many sites offer calculation of penalties for compulsory motor liability insurance using an online calculator in 2021.

Additional fines and penalties

In case of poor performance of the conditions and obligations specified in the MTPL agreement, other types of penalties may be applied to the insurer. To calculate the fine, a portion of compensation in the amount of 50% is taken. The amount does not include the amount of the penalty. To calculate, you can use the calculator for penalties and fines under MTPL agreements in 2021.

By decision of a judicial authority, the company may be required to reimburse the following expenses:

loss of commodity value (LCV), which the insurer refuses to pay;
the costs of an independent technical examination, which was recognized by the court as justification for the amount of payments;
moral damage caused by unfair work of the insurer (no more than 3 thousand rubles);
payment for representative services (does not exceed 10 thousand rubles);
postage costs for sending claims and claims;
other expenses arising during the proceedings.

Rights and obligations of the policyholder

Responsibilities of the policyholder:

Truthfully report to the insurer all information that may affect the determination of the degree of risk
Provide the insurer with the opportunity to inspect the vehicle and familiarize itself with all documents that relate to this vehicle
Pay insurance premiums in accordance with the agreement, without violating the terms established in this agreement
If an insured event occurs, the policyholder is obliged to follow all instructions of the insurer to reduce the amount of damage.

Rights of the policyholder:

On the conditions provided for by the legislation of the Russian Federation and directly by the insurance contract, it may terminate the contract early.
Has the right to complain about the insurer to the control body. By law, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation must control the activities of insurance companies. A complaint can be submitted via the Internet – the reception desk of the Central Bank. This saves time. A sample complaint can be found on the same resource.

Payment of sanctions

First you need to consider what it is. The provisions under consideration are understood as measures expressed in financial format. It is not implemented on a voluntary basis. It can be used against an insurer that does not comply with the provisions of legal acts. In this direction, Article 21 of the legislation on compulsory motor liability insurance applies. The payment is made if the periods regarding the decision-making on monetary compensation to persons injured in accidents are taken into account.

Judicial practice uses the following terms: 20 days, calendar days are taken into account. At the same time, it is important to note that non-working hours do not apply here. This includes holidays. The period begins from the day when the citizen filed an application to receive compensation to compensate for the harm caused to him.

The insurer is obligated to consider the application and make a decision within the prescribed period. It can be expressed in a positive or negative form. In any case, the answer must be reasoned.

The decision may also be expressed in the fact that the insurance company issues a referral to the citizen for auto repair work. It is important to note that the period can be 30 days. This applies to situations where the insurer provides written consent for the injured person to independently carry out work to restore the damaged car. The main condition is that the insurer does not have a concluded agreement with this organization.

The citizen will need to indicate in the application the name of the selected service where he plans to have his car repaired. In addition, the address of its location is displayed. After this, the insurer issues a referral for repairs. The responsibility for payment falls on the shoulders of the insurance company. When deadlines for repairs are violated, the insurer is obligated to pay for the measures imposed. It is equal to 1 percent of the total cost of compensation for the accident that occurred.

IMPORTANT !!! When the periods within which the insurer must issue a target denial are not taken into account, payment of the amount in question is ordered. The value is equal to 0.05 percent of the total transfer to the affected party. The 2021 calculation provides: the value may depend on the harm caused to the person during the accident. This value is accrued for one day until the funds are transferred. You can use a calculator to accurately calculate the total cost of the sanction.

Speaking about in what cases the insurer is obligated to pay the specified amount, it should be noted that the citizen creates an application. This act reflects the format used to transfer funds. In particular, it can be non-cash or cash payment. The details of the bank account are written down, where the specified amount will subsequently be transferred. The company does not have the opportunity to request additional documents from the person. Control functions regarding compliance with deadlines fall on the employees of the Bank of the country. The insurer may be exempt from such payment, provided that it confirms the fulfillment of specific obligations. In addition, recovery is not implemented if the delay is the fault of the party injured in the accident.

Calculation of penalties under compulsory motor liability insurance

The calculation is made depending on the reason for which it is reimbursed. For example, if a penalty is imposed for non-payment of insurance or for violation of payment terms, the calculation is made as follows: 1% of the amount of insurance payment for each day of delay.

If the insurer was supposed to pay 170,000 and delayed payment by 20 days, then the penalty will be: 170,000 x 0.01×20 = 34,000 rubles.

Important! The amount of the penalty should not exceed the amount of compensation. If the vehicle repair period is delayed, the penalty is calculated based on the cost of repairs and wear and tear.

The penalty is calculated only for the underpaid amount. For example, if the policyholder was supposed to be paid 240,000 rubles, but was paid 180,000, then the penalty is calculated for the remaining 60,000 rubles.

From what day is the penalty calculated?

If the insurance company motivated the refusal due to non-payment, but for some reason did not send it to the policyholder, the penalty is charged until the day the refusal is received, in the amount of 0.5% of the expected payment amount for each day.

The penalty is calculated from 21 days (if the policy was issued after 09/01/2014). Count from the day all documents are provided to the insurance company. The last day is when the settlement with the policyholder was made, including this day.

Minimum and maximum amounts of penalties

By law, the minimum amount of accrued payment for delay is limited to 0.2% for each day of delay of the insurance amount. The maximum amount is 90% of the total payment amount.

All other charges will be canceled by the court. According to Federal Law No. 40, maximum insurance amounts are established - 500,000 for compensation for damage to life and health and 400,000 for damage to property.

Court decisions

The culprit of the accident fled the scene.
The insurance company inflated the cost of repairs.

The culprit fled the scene of the accident

Accident at a pedestrian crossing

Car dealer paid compensation for ruined weekend

Fraudulent attempt to recover part of the damage from the culprit of the accident

Rules for filing a claim

Then a conflict situation arises between the insurer and the policyholder; the law provides for pre-trial settlement. To do this, a written claim is sent to the insurer. It can be sent by mail or delivered in person.

It is important to note that when going to court, the existence of a pre-trial settlement is taken into account. If you immediately contact the judicial authorities, your claim will not be accepted.

When can payments be denied?

It is worth considering that there are a number of legal grounds on which an insurance company can refuse a policyholder:

An incomplete package of documents was provided
The terms of the contract were violated or false or incomplete information was provided
This case is not insured as provided for in the contract.
The fact of fraud on the part of the policyholder was recorded
The deadline for submitting documents has passed

In some cases, not only insurers, but also judicial authorities can refuse to pay a penalty.

Pre-trial stage

The collection of penalties under compulsory motor liability insurance must begin by filing a claim with the insurer. It is compiled in free form. The claim must indicate:

date of application for insurance payment;
the amount of loss incurred by the policyholder;
date of submission of documents for payment.

The insurer has a working week to prepare a refusal or notify the client of payment (indicating the exact date). If there is no answer, or the policyholder is not satisfied with it, a claim is filed in court.

Important! The claim is drawn up in two copies. It is better to submit it in person: in order for the insurance company to put a receipt mark on each copy, one copy remains with the policyholder.

The procedure for collecting penalties through court

If the pre-trial claim is rejected or not considered by the insurance company, you must go to court to recover. To do this, we draw up a statement of claim and submit it to the court. This can be done by mail or delivered in person.

The application must indicate:

Name of the judicial authority where the application is submitted
Details of the plaintiff, details of his representative (if any), address and telephone number, also place of work and position
Details of the defendant, including the address of the organization and all its contact details
Describe the circumstances of the accident with all the details
Indicate the amount of the penalty and the reasons why the defendant must pay it
List the documents that are attached to the application
Plaintiff's signature with transcript. Exact date (the date of compilation and the date of submission must match!)

The statement of claim can also require the defendant to pay legal fees and a fine for violating consumer rights. It is worth taking into account that if the insurer voluntarily makes all payments, no fine will be imposed.

Attach a copy of your passport and all possible documents regulating the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant to the statement of claim. Be sure to attach a copy of the pre-trial complaint and the response to it.

If the policyholder fulfills the terms of the contract in good faith and an insured event occurs, the company is obliged to pay the insurance. If the insurance company does not fulfill its duties, we file a claim against it and demand a penalty.

The main thing is to clearly calculate the amount of payments, attach all documents, and be sure to carry out pre-trial conflict resolution. The courts mostly side with the insurers.

Didn't find the answer to your question? Find out how to solve exactly your problem - call right now: +7 (Moscow) +7 (812) 309-53-42 (St. Petersburg) It's fast and free!

Free online consultation with a car lawyer

Didn't find the answer to your question? Find out how to solve exactly your problem - call right now: +7 (Moscow) +7 (812) 309-53-42 (St. Petersburg) It's fast and free!

Customer Reviews

Gratitude from Gordeeva E.S. I express my special gratitude to Sergei Vyacheslavovich for his highly competent and detailed consultation on the issue of the employment contract.

Doctor of Philological Sciences, Gordeeva E.S. 12/01/2018

Gratitude from Remedova A.G. I express my gratitude to the Legal Agency of St. Petersburg, namely Denis Yuryevich Stepanov, for the assistance provided in resolving my issue, and I also express my gratitude to the entire team of the consumer rights protection society for their responsiveness and pleasant communication.

Remedova A.G. 08/17/2018

Gratitude from Ustinova T.M. I would like to express my deep gratitude to Sergei Vyacheslavovich for the legal services provided when I had a difficult relationship with Beauty Salon LLC and Alfa-Bank.

Ustinova T.M. November 10, 2018

Gratitude from Ivanov I express my gratitude to Vasily Anatolyevich for the correct and competent legal assistance in solving my case. I wish you and your entire company prosperity and success.

With all my heart, V.V. Ivanov. 05/10/2018

Review by Egorova A.N. I, Egorova Antonina Nikolaevna, am very pleased with the consultation of Yuri Vladimirovich Sukhovarov. Thank you for your attentiveness and understanding. I wish you further professional growth.

Letter of thanks

Gratitude from Piskunov I.B. I just don’t have words to express my gratitude to Sergei Vyacheslavovich. Thank you for having such a lawyer. Thank you for your help regarding the issue regarding the employment contract.

Piskunov I.B. 12/12/2018

Gratitude to Solovyov I would like to express my deepest gratitude and appreciation to Konstantin Vasilievich Solovyov for his attentive attitude and very competent consultation. And if I ever need legal support, I will definitely turn to him. I would also like to mention Daria Valentinovna Kutuzova, who greeted me with a smile and answered some of my questions. I wish the company success, further prosperity, and more clients.

Review by Irina D. I thank the Legal Agency of St. Petersburg for the warm, sincere welcome and the detailed, competent, thorough, conscientious legal position of lawyer Andrei Valerievich.

Gratitude from gr. Moskovchuk V.G. I express my deep gratitude to lawyer Denis Yuryevich for the consultation and bringing the case to its logical conclusion. Legal documents were drawn up very competently and sent to court. The case is won. Hooray!!! Thank you very much!

Plaintiff: Moskovchuk V. G.

Extension of the payment and repair period under compulsory motor liability insurance

There are cases when extending the repair period is considered justified and legal. In the following situations, the policyholder has no right to demand payment of a penalty and collection of financial sanctions under compulsory motor liability insurance:

Art. 12, paragraph 11 of the law on compulsory motor liability insurance states that the insurer is obliged to review the documents and make a decision to carry out repairs within five days from the date of receipt of the application. However, if the policyholder violates the established procedure by not providing the car for inspection, or by not supporting his application with relevant documents, the review period is extended. Until the client presents the car or its remains for examination, he may not count on payment. If the vehicle is not provided within 20 days, the insurer gives a written refusal to carry out repairs.
The car was taken for repairs, but the service center workers did not have time to repair the damage within the agreed time frame. If the repair organization is chosen by the insurer, but the client is notified of the delay in time and does not express dissatisfaction, then this is lawful and is not a basis for imposing a financial sanction. If the service was chosen by the policyholder himself, and the insurance company only paid for the damage, then this situation does not concern him at all - all controversial issues are settled between the motorist and the service workers.
The client is dissatisfied with the quality of the work performed. If he can prove that the damage was not fully eliminated, cheap materials were used or the work was performed poorly, the insurance company undertakes to eliminate all defects within the agreed period. However, this is not supported by a fine.

Advice! Any controversial issues must be resolved through written correspondence. Reasons, arguments and justifications should be recorded on paper to make it easier to prove your case if the case goes to court.

The penalty has limits

Rosgosstrakh tried to challenge this decision - first by filing an appeal with the Supreme Court of Adygea, and later with the Fourth Cassation Court of General Jurisdiction. In both cases, the court rulings were also left unchanged. In November 2020, the cassation appeal reached the Supreme Court of Russia. The insurers insisted: according to clause 6 of Art. 16.1 of the law on compulsory motor liability insurance, the total amount of the penalty payable to an individual cannot exceed the amount of the insured amount.

“By virtue of paragraph “b” of Art. 7 of the law on compulsory motor liability insurance, the insured amount in terms of compensation for damage to property cannot exceed 400 thousand rubles,” the text of the complaint stated. And taking into account all the payments, it turned out that a penalty in the amount of 425 thousand rubles was collected from the insurer, which exceeds the limit established by law.

Why pay more

Photo: TASS/Yuri Smityuk

We'll have to look: what motorists can expect in 2021

New rules for registering tuning, passing technical inspections and passing license exams

The Supreme Court supported the position of the insurance company, recalling that the limit on penalties is limited to 400 thousand rubles. In addition, the court drew attention to the fact that, by virtue of paragraph 1 of Art. 333 of the Civil Code, if the penalty to be paid is “clearly disproportionate to the consequences of violation of the obligation,” this amount may be reduced.

“If the obligation is violated by a person carrying out entrepreneurial activities, the court has the right to reduce the penalty, subject to the debtor’s application for such a reduction. This norm, in essence, provides for the court’s obligation to establish a balance between the measure of responsibility applied to the violator and the assessment of the actual, and not the possible, amount of damage caused as a result of a specific offense,” the Supreme Court’s ruling says.

The Supreme Court explained: in previous decisions, the judges did not assess the proportionality of the accrued penalty in the total amount of 425,300 rubles to the actual damage caused to the plaintiff - which is 275,300 rubles. That is, the motorist’s damages due to the insurance company’s refusal to pay for repairs turned out to be much lower compared to the amount accrued for each day the insurance company was unwilling to voluntarily cover the damage.

Shaky app: filing an accident using a smartphone turned out to be difficult

The Bank of Russia was asked to clarify the functionality of the mobile applications “DTP.Europrotocol” and “OSAGO Assistant”

“The courts also did not evaluate the arguments of PJSC IC Rosgosstrakh about the plaintiff receiving unjustified benefits in the event of collecting a penalty that significantly exceeds the insurance compensation, which contradicts paragraph 2 of Art. 333 of the Civil Code,” the Supreme Court summarized and sent the case for a new trial.

Pre-trial claim against the insurance company under compulsory motor liability insurance

Before filing a claim in court, the policyholder must submit a pre-trial claim to the insurance company. This is a warning that the policyholder's next step will be to go to court if the insurer refuses to pay compensation. The text must indicate the name and address of the recipient, full name of the sender, the essence of the requirement, details and a list of attached documents, including:

copy of the passport;
a document confirming ownership of the damaged vehicle;
power of attorney and a copy of the representative’s passport (if necessary);
opinion of an independent expert;
a copy of the document confirming the offense or refusal to initiate criminal proceedings.

The claim must be submitted in person at the insurance company branch. A copy of the document must be marked with acceptance - the date and signature of the insurance employee who accepted the package of papers.

you can do it directly on our website.