Reso guarantee requirement for payment of insurance compensation. Consideration of a claim against the insurance company "Reso-Garantia"

05.10.11 an accident occurred between me, BBB policy No. 0167526034 (victim) and (culprit) BBB No. 0525933098 client of RESO-GARANTIA OSAO. The police officer recorded everything. Next, the RESO-GARANTIA office, recognition of the event as an insured event, an “independent” examination by RESO-GARANTIA, an offer to make a payment on a freely issued Barclays bank card, and finally payment for the insured event. All this within the time limits established by law and without complaints. Let's call it a PLUS.
Further about payment. According to the expert opinion based on the report on my case No. AT3082192,
RESO-GARANTIA IJSC paid insurance compensation in the amount of 29,018 rubles. 62 kopecks.
And based on ordering a work order to carry out restoration repairs and purchase used spare parts, the amount was 50,500 rubles. 00 kopecks. Feel the difference! Let's call it a MINUS.
I want to emphasize that this car service is not expensive in terms of prices for repairs (checked) and the spare parts were not bought new, but used ones for dismantling and cost several times cheaper than new ones. And in order not to be unfounded, I will write what was used for replacement and repair according to the estimate “independent examination” and what can be replaced and what can be repaired in the service on request along with.
So:
According to the report of an “independent examination” In the order-to-order service along with
1) Trunk lid - replacement, painting 1) Trunk lid - replacement, painting
2) Rear bumper - replacement, painting 2) Rear bumper - replacement, painting
3) Bumper molding - replacement 3) Bumper molding - repair
4) Bumper spoiler - replacement 4) Bumper spoiler - repair
5) Parking sensor - replacement, painting 5) Parking sensor - repair, painting
6) Left rear light - replacement 6) Left rear light - replacement
7) Inscription FOCUS - replacement 7) Inscription FOCUS - repair
8) Gutter gutter - repair, painting 8) Gutter gutter - repair, painting
9) Rear panel - replacement, painting 9) Rear panel - repair, painting
Now let’s estimate how much the restoration repair would cost me if instead of repairing (9) Rear panel, 5) Parking sensor, 4) Bumper spoiler, 3) Bumper molding, 7) FOCUS inscription) I had to buy these seven spare parts , as written in the “independent examination” report (replacement). Thanks to the guys from the service, they understand the client and are ready to reduce his costs with his consent.
RESO-GARANTIA OSAO also understands the costs, but alas, not the client, but the costs of its own company, which is confirmed by the amount of payment in case No. AT3082192, at least for today, but today is not the end of the world, I will act, maybe something will change in the best side.
I would also be able to understand the underestimated amount of payments for an insured event if an insurance company client constantly but unintentionally gets into an accident, or, on the contrary, deliberately and repeatedly substitutes in order to obtain insurance, or uses new spare parts during restoration repairs, thereby increasing the amount of his expenses.
But specifically in my case, spare parts were bought used, only what could not be fixed was replaced, what could be repaired was repaired, and not stupidly changed, and the service was not expensive and still there was not enough payment. By the way, I myself am an insured
OSAO RESO-GARANTIYA for 8 or 9 years now, constantly and on two cars, and I never once emphasize that during these years I have not framed OSAO RESO-GARANTIA for payments due to my fault.
Tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, I will send by mail a pre-trial claim to RESO-GARANTIA OSAO for underestimating the amount of damage caused to my vehicle. Of course, there is not enough time for all this trouble, but I have not used the representative yet and if this home-grown payment in my case does not move, then of course I will have to take advantage of its services in full. Then no one canceled the letters of complaint to the FSSN, FSSR, RSA, Ministry of Finance, Television, Government of the Russian Federation, but that’s all if...
At the moment, I don’t need anything extra, in the moral sense, etc., but I’m not going to give away my money either.
I think that this is not the last review, and what the next one will be depends of course on the actions
OSAO RESO-GARANTIYA.
Sincerely, Alexander. I’m not giving a rating YET. Everything is fair.
And to everyone: No nail, no rod, no insured event!

I liked poking the appraiser’s photographer’s nose so that he would photograph all the defective details, and not what he wanted. The poor fellow even pinched his finger when he climbed under the bumper, under my strict guidance.

Payment amount.

Payout speed

Payment amount

Quality of service

Reply to review

Representative of the UK

Alexander Yurievich, good afternoon!

We inform you that the MTPL Law obliges insurance companies to enter into contractual relations with independent expert organizations in order to inspect the vehicle and prepare cost estimates for restoration repairs. Accordingly, this independent examination service is provided free of charge to our clients.

In that part of the documents that the insurance company is obliged to provide you, RESO-Garantiya has fulfilled its obligations.

Please note that the expert opinion is the property of an independent expert.
In this regard, you can receive a complete set of documents with photographic materials and licenses by directly contacting an independent expert and paying for the services yourself.

Thank you for your contact.

On the eve of the New Year, we wish you and your loved ones prosperity and accident-free roads.

Sincerely,

Vera Ivanovna Labur

21.12.11
Good afternoon, Alexander Yurievich!
On October 6, 2011, you contacted the Payment Center on Nagorny Proezd with an application for payment of insurance compensation for damage to your 2006 Ford Focus vehicle.
Based on the results of consideration of the payment case, on October 11, 2011, you were paid an insurance compensation in the amount of 29,018.62 rubles.
On November 1, 2011, you received a letter requesting that you provide a copy of the insured event report, the vehicle inspection report and the calculation of the restoration repairs.
On November 23, 2011, the requested documents were sent to your address by official letter.
You have not received any statements of disagreement with the amount of insurance compensation paid to you, as well as documents confirming the actual costs incurred by you to repair the vehicle.
In this regard, we cannot comment on your message regarding the funds you spent on restoring the vehicle.
Sincerely,
_________________________________
Vera Ivanovna Labur
Deputy Head of the Customer Service Quality Department.
Head of the department for working with reviews of RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company

SOLUTION

IN THE NAME OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

On August 17, 2012, the Golovinsky District Court of Moscow, composed of presiding judge T.G. Zhilkina, with secretary A.N. Svitushkov, considered in open court civil case No. 2-2773/12 on the claim of D.Yu. Reztsov. to Sheftel O.L., Open Insurance Joint-Stock Company "RESO-Garantiya" for compensation for damage caused by a traffic accident,

U S T A N O V I L:

Plaintiff Reztsov D.Yu. represented by a representative by proxy Lubnina M.A. filed a lawsuit against Sheftel O.L., RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company for compensation for damage caused by a traffic accident, and asked to recover from RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company the costs of restoring the vehicle in the amount of 78,970 rubles. 67 kopecks; from Sheftel O.L. the difference between the insurance compensation and the actual amount of damage in the amount of 11,534 rubles. 79 kopecks, expenses for conducting an examination of the vehicle in the amount of 5,000 rubles; recover from the defendant and co-defendant in proportion to the size of the satisfied claims the legal costs: state duty in the amount of 3065 rubles. 15 kopecks; expenses for issuing a judicial power of attorney to a representative in the amount of 1,200 rubles; expenses for paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 35,000 rubles, citing the fact that on March 17, 2012 there was a traffic accident involving a car<данные изъяты> <данные изъяты>, belonging to Reztsov D.Yu.. In accordance with the certificate of the road accident, the resolution in the case of an administrative offense found Sheftel O.L. guilty of this road accident, having violated paragraphs. 8.4 Traffic rules of the Russian Federation. RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company paid the plaintiff 41,029 rubles towards insurance compensation. 33 kopecks. In accordance with Report No. dated April 10, 2012 on the assessment of the market value of the right to claim compensation for losses resulting from damage to a car in a traffic accident<данные изъяты> the cost of restoration repairs, taking into account wear and tear of parts, amounted to 131,534 rubles. 79 kopecks. At the court hearing, the representative of the plaintiff, by proxy, Lubnin M.A. supported the claims. RESO-Garantiya IJSC was duly notified of the time and place of the hearing of the case, the representative did not appear at the court hearing, did not inform the court about the reasons for his failure to appear, and did not submit written requests to postpone the hearing of the case. Sheftel O.L. was duly notified of the time and place of the hearing of the case, did not appear at the court hearing, did not inform the court about the reasons for his failure to appear, and did not submit written requests to postpone the hearing of the case. At the court hearing on August 8, 2012, he did not dispute guilt in the traffic accident and the amount. In accordance with Art. 233 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation 1. In the event of a failure to appear at a court hearing by a defendant who has been notified of the time and place of the court hearing, who has not reported valid reasons for the failure to appear and has not asked to consider the case in his absence, the case may be considered in absentia proceedings. The court issues a ruling on the consideration of the case in this manner. 2. If several defendants participate in the case, consideration of the case in absentia proceedings is possible in the event of failure of all defendants to appear at the court hearing. Representative of the plaintiff by proxy Lubnina M.A. agreed to consider the case in absentia proceedings in the absence of the defendants, and the court decided to consider the case in absentia proceedings. The court, having heard the representative of the plaintiff by proxy, Lubnina M.A. Having checked and studied the case materials, the court considers the claims to be satisfied on the following grounds. In accordance with Art. 56 of the Civil Procedure Code of the Russian Federation 1. Each party must prove the circumstances to which it refers as the basis for its claims and objections, unless otherwise provided by federal law. 2. The court determines what circumstances are important for the case, which party must prove them, and brings the circumstances up for discussion, even if the parties did not refer to any of them. According to Art. 15 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation 1. A person whose right has been violated may demand full compensation for the losses caused to him, unless the law or contract provides for compensation for losses in a smaller amount. 2. Losses are understood as expenses that a person whose right has been violated has made or will have to make to restore the violated right, loss or damage to his property (real damage), as well as lost income that this person would have received under normal conditions of civil circulation, if his right had not been violated (lost profits). In accordance with Art. 1064 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, damage caused to the property of a legal entity is subject to compensation in full by the person who caused the damage. By law, the obligation to compensate for harm may be imposed on a person who is not the cause of harm. By virtue of Art. 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, legal entities and citizens whose activities are associated with an increased danger to others (use of vehicles...) are obliged to compensate for harm caused by a source of increased danger, unless they prove that the harm arose as a result of force majeure or the intent of the victim. The obligation to compensate for damage is assigned to a legal entity or citizen who owns a source of increased danger by right of ownership, right of economic management or right of operational management, or on another legal basis (by lease, by power of attorney to drive a vehicle, etc.). According to paragraph 1 of Art. 929 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, under a property insurance contract, one party (the insurer) undertakes to compensate the other party (the policyholder) or another person in whose favor the contract is concluded (the beneficiary) for the payment stipulated by the contract (insurance premium) upon the occurrence of an event stipulated in the contract (insured event). losses caused as a result of this event in the insured property or losses in connection with other property interests of the insured (pay insurance compensation) within the amount specified in the contract (insurance amount). According to paragraph 3 of Art. 931 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, an insurance contract for the risk of liability for causing harm is considered concluded in favor of persons who may be harmed (beneficiaries), even if the contract is concluded in favor of the insured or another person responsible for causing harm, or the contract does not state in whose the benefit is concluded. 4. In the event that liability for causing harm is insured due to the fact that its insurance is mandatory, as well as in other cases provided for by law or the insurance contract for such liability, the person in whose favor the insurance contract is considered to be concluded has the right to make a direct claim to the insurer compensation for damage within the insured amount. According to Art. 1072 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a legal entity or citizen who has insured its liability through voluntary or compulsory insurance in favor of the victim, in the case where the insurance compensation is not enough to fully compensate for the harm caused, compensates the difference between the insurance compensation and the actual amount of damage. According to Art. 307 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation 1. By virtue of an obligation, one person (debtor) is obliged to perform a certain action in favor of another person (creditor), such as: transfer property, perform work, pay money, etc., or refrain from a certain action, and the creditor has the right to demand that the debtor fulfill his obligation. 2. Obligations arise from a contract, as a result of causing harm and from other grounds specified in this Code. According to Art. 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. According to Art. 1082 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, satisfying the claim for compensation for harm, the court, in accordance with the circumstances of the case, obliges the person responsible for causing the harm to compensate for the harm in kind (provide a thing of the same kind and quality, correct the damaged thing, etc.) or compensate for the losses caused ( paragraph 2 of article 15). As established by the court, on March 17, 2012, a traffic accident occurred involving a car<данные изъяты>, under the control of Sheftel O.L., as a result of whose actions significant mechanical damage was caused to the car<данные изъяты>, owned by Reztsov D.Yu.. As a result of this traffic accident, mechanical damage was caused to the car of the brand<данные изъяты>: damaged left and right front headlights, front bumper, hood, front panel, left front door, hidden damage (case sheet 11). Resolution No. in the case of an administrative offense dated March 17, 2012 Sheftel O.L. was brought to administrative responsibility under Part 3 of Art. 12.14 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses for violation of clause 8.4 of the Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation (case file 11). Civil liability of the defendant Sheftel O.L. at the time of the traffic accident, she was insured by RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company under policy no. March 21, 2012 Reztsov D.Yu. appealed to RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company with a claim for damages. On March 27, 2012, the plaintiff’s damaged car was inspected by a specialist from PARTNER LLC. Inspection report No. dated March 27, 2012 recorded numerous damages, including possible hidden damages (case file 15). On April 3, 2012, a re-inspection of the damaged vehicle was carried out. In accordance with Inspection Report No., the list of damages has been increased. The repeated inspection report also noted the possibility of hidden damage (case file 16). On March 27, 2012, NEK-GROUP LLC carried out an expert assessment of vehicles, according to which the cost of restoration of the damaged vehicle, taking into account wear and tear, amounted to 41,029 rubles. 33 kopecks (case sheet 17-18). According to Report No. dated April 10, 2012 on the assessment of the market value of the right to claim compensation for losses resulting from damage to a car in an accident<данные изъяты>, compiled by LLC “Center for Independent Expertise “Varshavsky”, the cost of restoration repairs, taking into account wear and tear of parts, amounted to 131,534 rubles. 79 kopecks (case file 22-52). By virtue of clause “c” of Article 7 of the Federal Law “On Compulsory Insurance of Civil Liability of Vehicle Owners”, the insurance amount is within the limits of which the insurer, upon the occurrence of each insured event (regardless of their number during the validity period of the compulsory insurance contract) undertakes to compensate the victims the damage caused is: in terms of compensation for damage caused to the property of one victim, no more than 120 thousand rubles. The court considers it possible to base the decision on Report No. dated April 10, 2012 on the assessment of the market value of the right to claim compensation for losses resulting from damage to a car in an accident<данные изъяты> , compiled by LLC “Center for Independent Expertise “Varshavsky”, since it meets the requirements of the law on the admissibility and relevance of evidence (Articles 59, 60 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation). As for the Expert Assessment of Motor Transport, compiled by NEK-GROUP LLC on March 27, 2012, the court cannot take it into account, since it was carried out in violation of the requirements of the Federal Law “On Appraisal Activities in the Russian Federation”, Orders of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation dated 20 July 2007 No. 256 “General concepts of assessment, approaches to assessment and requirements for assessment (FSO No. 1)”, No. 255 “On approval of the federal assessment standard “Purpose of assessment and types of value (FSO No. 2)”, No. 254 “On approval of the federal assessment standard “Requirements for an assessment report (FSO No. 3)”, which are mandatory for use when carrying out assessment activities. The Expert Assessment does not contain information about the expert appraisers, does not provide documents confirming their qualifications, does not indicate approaches to conducting the assessment and the motivation for their non-use. Also, the Expert assessment of motor vehicles also does not meet the requirements of the Methodological recommendations for conducting an independent technical examination of a vehicle under compulsory motor liability insurance of October 12, 2004 No. 001MR/SE, developed in pursuance of the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of April 24, 2003 No. 238 “On the organization of an independent technical examination of vehicles funds" and Order of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation No. 171/183/590 dated July 30, 2003 "On the implementation of Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of April 24, 2003 No. 238 "On the organization of independent technical expertise vehicles" taking into account the requirements of the Federal Law "On compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners", Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of May 7, 2003 No. 263 "On approval of the rules of compulsory civil liability insurance of vehicle owners", since there is no reference to the technical literature used and manufacturer's catalogs, the technical condition of the vehicle is not described, there are no provisions provided for in clause 8.4.9. “001MR/SE” photographic materials, there is no full company name and location of the insurer, identification document details of the victim, justification for the results of an independent technical examination, as well as restrictions and limits of application of the results obtained. In addition, “001MR/SE” establishes that independent technical expertise, including the inspection stage, can only be carried out by expert technicians. Assessing the evidence in its relevance, admissibility, reliability, as well as the sufficiency and interconnection of the evidence in its totality, the court comes to the conclusion that the defendant’s violation of Sheftel O.L. Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation led to a traffic accident, which resulted in damage to the property of Reztsov D.Yu.. Since the civil liability of the defendant Sheftel O.L. at the time of the traffic accident was insured by RESO-Garantia Insurance Company, the court considers the difference between the previously paid insurance compensation and the insurer's liability limit in the amount of 78,970 rubles to be recovered from the defendant RESO-Garantia Insurance Company. 67 kopecks (120,000 rubles - 41,029 rubles 33 kopecks). From Sheftel O.L. in favor of Reztsov D.Yu. the amount not covered by insurance compensation is subject to recovery: 11,534 rubles. 79 kopecks (RUB 131,534 79 kopecks - RUB 120,000). In accordance with Art. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, taking into account the principle of reasonableness and the scope of protection of the violated right, the court considers it possible to determine the amount of expenses for paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 15,000 rubles. In accordance with paragraph 1 of Art. 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation in proportion to the amount of the amounts recovered in favor of Reztsov D.Yu. from Sheftel O.L. the costs of paying for the preparation of the Report in the amount of 5,000 rubles, the costs of paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 2,596 rubles are subject to recovery. 94 kopecks, costs for issuing a power of attorney in the amount of 207 rubles. 76 kop. and the cost of paying state duty in the amount of 530 rubles. 67 kopecks; RESO-Garantiya IJSC is subject to recovery of expenses for payment of representative services in the amount of 12,403 rubles. 06 kopecks, costs for issuing a power of attorney in the amount of 992 rubles. 24 kopecks and the cost of paying state duty in the amount of 2534 rubles. 48 kopecks. Based on the above, guided by Articles 194-199, 237 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation,

Claims of Reztsov D.Yu. to Sheftel O.L., Open Insurance Joint Stock Company "RESO-Garantiya" for compensation for damage caused by a traffic accident - satisfy. Collect from Sheftel O.L. in favor of Reztsov D.Yu. 11534 rub. 79 kopecks, expenses for the preparation of the Report in the amount of 5,000 rubles, expenses for paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 2,596 rubles. 94 kopecks, costs for issuing a power of attorney in the amount of 207 rubles. 76 kop. and the cost of paying state duty in the amount of 530 rubles. 67 kopecks. To recover from the Open Insurance Joint Stock Company "RESO-Garantiya" in favor of Reztsov D.Yu. 78970 rub. 67 kopecks, expenses for paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 12,403 rubles. 06 kopecks, costs for issuing a power of attorney in the amount of 992 rubles. 24 kopecks and the cost of paying state duty in the amount of 2534 rubles. 48 kopecks. For a decision in absentia, an application for review of the decision can be submitted to the Golovinsky District Court of Moscow within 7 days from the date of delivery of a copy of the decision, or the decision can be appealed to the Moscow City Court within a month after the expiration of the deadline for filing an application to cancel the decision court, and if such an application is filed - within a month from the date of the court’s ruling to refuse to satisfy this application.

Court decision to the Russian Union of Auto Insurers

Lawyer at Profsoyuznaya metro station

Court decisions in civil cases

Judicial practice in civil cases

Act correctly (memos to car owners) I’ve been trying to apply for a policy online for five days now - the site freezes and throws me to the login page! When you try to contact the operator and clarify the data on the policy, they immediately send you an email indicating that the problem with electronic policies has nothing to do with them! – Complete lack of subordination on the part of the operator, neglect of clients, lack of consultation on electronic OSAGO policies, website not working properly! Speed ​​of payment Payment amount Evgeniy Borisovich (guest) 11/19/2019 15:17 Comment I, Sergey Grigorievich Ivanov, would like to express my gratitude to the Reso-Garantia company for restoring the OSAGO discount Policy No. EEE0386085222. I have been insuring my dacha for many years. in this company, division No. 15 village.

Open Insurance Joint Stock Company - RESO-Garantiya

OSAGO: questions and answers

Reviews from the company RESO-Garantiya

“Yes, we steal; And even though we got caught, we still won’t give you your money back.”

Insurance payments

I insured a 2008 Honda Civic under CASCO with RESO GARANTIA, and paid about 100 thousand rubles for insurance. Policy number SYS609707549.

Due to an insured event (the rear bumper and left light were damaged), repairs were made at an auto boutique on Sedova. The repair was done disgustingly, after six months the paint began to fall off the bumper, and it is clearly visible that no primer was applied before painting. I called the company, they said: “Sort it out with the auto repair shop.” This auto repair shop has already closed! After writing a complaint to Reso, I received an answer that they had fulfilled their obligations, transferred money to the auto repair shop, but they were not responsible for the quality.

Moscow, st.

Reviews about the insurance company RESO-Garantiya

Errors in documents - The series and number of the policy of the second participant are not completely indicated, the numbers are mixed up. — Abbreviations in the name of the insurer of the second participant in the accident do not allow us to determine which company actually issued his policy. — Traffic rules that are violated by drivers are not indicated, or there is no information about violations at all; The article of the Code of Administrative Offenses establishing the responsibility of drivers is not indicated. — There is no data on the number of participants in road accidents. — There is no data on the presence or absence of victims (persons who suffered harm to life and health) in an accident. — State and/or transit numbers of both vehicles are not indicated. — ALL damage received by the car is not indicated.

Insurance company RESO - offices, addresses, description

DSAGO from RESO-GARANTIA

Insurance company - RESO-garantiya - in Belgorod

Calculate CASCO at RESO Guarantee

Which insurance company is better?

Reso insurance payments

St. Petersburg, Rustaveli str., no. 53 Maximu-Lakhta Service LLC. Reso-Garantia. to Bogdanov.Irina Yurievna. Gives out incorrect information, provides sample statements from her own manual, delivers information about working with your department, statements, correspondence by mail on her behalf. (There is evidence, she personally gave me information from her work mail, a message with managers, specialists in remote claims settlement ) with your employees, for their own selfish purposes. In terms of work. The person is trying to deceive anyone, do not believe her. Maxim Car Insurance / OSAGO November 11, 2019 09:57 October 23, 2019 was injured in an accident.

Our phone number is +7-905-5555-200

Case No. 2-128/11
SOLUTION

Moskovsky District Court of St. Petersburg composed of:

Presiding judge Volkovich V.M.

Under secretary Smirnova A.V.

With the participation of lawyer V.V. Storublevtsev.

Having considered in open court a civil case based on the claim of Martynova E.V. to RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company for the collection of insurance compensation, interest,

INSTALLED:

Martynova E.V. filed a lawsuit against the defendant RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company for the recovery of insurance compensation, interest, citing the fact that DD.MM.YYYY she entered into an insurance agreement with the defendant for a car of the brand “IVECO STRALIS 430” g.r.z.<данные изъяты>, owned by her, valid from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY, in the amount of 47,720 US dollars for the risks of “damage” and “theft”. DD.MM.YYYY the specified vehicle was stolen. A criminal case was opened on this fact; the stolen car was not found. The plaintiff applied to the insurance company for payment of insurance compensation, providing all the necessary documents. DD.MM.YYYY the defendant paid part of the insurance compensation in the amount of 867,008 rubles. and the corresponding calculation is presented. The plaintiff believes that the defendant did not pay the insurance compensation in full, and therefore asks to recover 400,916 rubles as insurance compensation. 65 kopecks, as well as interest for the use of other people's funds for the period from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY, expenses for paying state duty, representative services, paying for an expert report and paying for a forensic examination (case sheet 5- 6, 178-179).

Plaintiff Martynova E.V. did not appear at the court hearing, instructing lawyer V.V. Storublevtsev to represent her interests, who appeared at the court hearing and insisted that the claims be satisfied in full (case sheets 78-80).

Representative of the defendant OSAO "RESO-Garantiya" Sokolova Yu.V. appeared at the court hearing, objected to the stated claims in full, and, in addition, explained that the defendant fulfilled its obligations under the insurance contract in full, and therefore interest was paid in accordance with Art. 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation are not subject to collection. In addition, she pointed out that the costs for a representative were too high.

Having listened to the explanations of the parties, studied the case materials, reviewed the criminal case materials, established the relevant circumstances in the case, analyzed and assessed the presented evidence in its entirety, the court considers it possible to satisfy the claims of Martynova E.V. for the following reasons.

The court found that DD.MM.YYYY between RESO-Garantiya OSJSC and E.V. Martynova. an insurance contract was concluded for a vehicle (policy No. SYS314572566) - a car of the brand “IVECO STRALIS 430”, reg.z.<данные изъяты>, 2003 release (case sheet 22). From this agreement it follows that its validity period is from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY, the insured amount for the risk of “theft” is 47,720 US dollars, a circle of persons defined by specific characteristics is allowed to drive the specified vehicle.

As can be seen from the case materials and materials of the payment case No. AT 1919219, Martynova E.V. represented by its representative DD.MM.YYYY contacted the Payment Center<адрес>IJSC "RESO-Garantiya" with notification of the theft of the insured vehicle (case sheet 47-48).

The court found that DD.MM.YYYY, in connection with the theft of the plaintiff’s vehicle, a criminal case was initiated on the grounds of a crime under Art. 158 part 4 paragraph “b” of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (case file 64). By resolution dated DD.MM.YYYY, the proceedings in the case were suspended for failure to identify the persons subject to criminal liability (case file 71).

By virtue of clause 12.8 of the Rules, in the event of theft of an insured vehicle, the amount of insurance compensation is determined based on the insured amount for the risk of “theft”, taking into account wear and tear of the vehicle during the validity period of the insurance contract (clause 5.9 of the Rules).

According to clause 5.9 of the Rules, during the period of validity of the insurance contract, the Insurer applies the following depreciation rates for the insured vehicle (as a percentage of the insured amount): for the 1st year of operation - 20% (for the first month - 3%, for the second - 2%, for the third and subsequent months - 1.5% for each month); for the 2nd year of operation - 15% (1.25% for each month); for the 3rd and subsequent years of operation - 12% per year (1% for each month).

DD.MM.YYYY the defendant calculated the amount of insurance compensation in the amount of 867,008 rubles. (case file 41) taking into account the assessment of the cost of the vehicle of KAR-EX LLC (case file 187-191) and the specified amount was paid to the plaintiff DD.MM.YYYY (case file 30), which they did not disputed. In this case, the calculation of insurance compensation is made taking into account the wear and tear of the car.

The plaintiff does not agree with the amount of the insurance compensation paid, believing it to be underestimated, and therefore, in support of his demands for recovery of the amount of insurance compensation in the remaining part, Martynova E.V. presented a report on the valuation of the car of Aspect LLC, according to which the market value of the vehicle was 1,704,000 rubles. (ld. 121-150).

If the agreement of the parties, including the insurance rules in force with the insurer, provides for taking into account the depreciation of the insured property when determining the amount of insurance payment, this rule is subject to application.

In accordance with Art. 943 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the conditions under which an insurance contract is concluded can be determined in the standard rules of insurance of the corresponding type, adopted, approved or approved by the insurer. Conditions contained in the insurance rules and not included in the text of the insurance contract are binding on the policyholder if the contract directly states the application of such rules and the rules themselves are set out in the same document with the contract or on its reverse side or attached to it. In the latter case, delivery of the insurance rules to the policyholder upon conclusion of the contract must be certified by an entry in the contract.

From the text of the insurance policy it follows that the plaintiff received the Insurance Rules and agrees with them.

Under these circumstances, the Insurance Rules are subject to application to the legal relations that have arisen between the parties.

As stated above, clause 12.8 of the Motor Vehicle Insurance Rules of RESO-Garantia Insurance Company - in the event of theft of an insured vehicle, the amount of insurance compensation is determined based on the insured amount for the risk of “theft”, taking into account wear and tear of the vehicle during the validity period of the insurance contract (clause 5.9 Rules).

According to Art. 947 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the amount within which the insurer undertakes to pay insurance compensation under a property insurance contract (insurance amount) is determined by an agreement between the policyholder and the insurer in accordance with the rules provided for in this article. When insuring property, unless otherwise provided by the insurance contract, the insured amount should not exceed their actual value (insurance value). This value is considered to be the actual value of the property at its location on the day the insurance contract is concluded.

By virtue of Art. 948 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the insured value of property specified in the insurance contract cannot be subsequently disputed, except in the case where the insurer, who did not exercise its right to assess the insurance risk before concluding the contract (clause 1 of Article 945), was deliberately misled regarding this cost.

In accordance with Article 431 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, when interpreting the terms of an agreement, the court takes into account the literal meaning of the words and expressions contained in it.

As can be seen from the text of the insurance contract (RESOauto policy), concluded with Martynova E.V., the parties came to an agreement and determined the insured amounts for the insured risks.

The defendant, in his calculation (case sheet 41), indicates that the cost of the vehicle at the time of concluding the insurance contract was 942,400 rubles.

According to expert opinion No. D-2-128/11 (additional forensic examination) dated DD.MM.YYYY, the market value of the plaintiff’s vehicle, taking into account the wheeled modification of this vehicle, at the time of concluding the insurance contract DD.MM.YYYY was 1,560,000 rubles. (ld. 162-174).

This expert opinion was assessed by the court and taken into account, because does not contradict other evidence presented and explanations of persons participating in the case, and also complies with the principles of admissibility of evidence.

Thus, the court finds it established that the actual value (insurance value) of the plaintiff’s car at the time of concluding the insurance contract was 1,560,000 rubles.

The occurrence of an insured event (theft of a car) provided for in a property insurance contract entails the recovery from the insurer of the amount of insurance compensation within the limits of the actual value of the car determined at the time of concluding this contract.

The court found that the defendant paid an insurance compensation of 867,008 rubles, that is, in a smaller amount than the actual value of the vehicle established by a forensic examination, and also less than the insured amount established by the insurance contract.

Under these circumstances, the court comes to the conclusion that the payment of insurance compensation to the plaintiff was not made by the defendant in full, and therefore the plaintiff’s demands for recovery of the unpaid part of the insurance compensation must be satisfied. At the same time, the court draws attention to the fact that, according to the conclusion of the forensic examination, the actual value of the plaintiff’s vehicle at the time of concluding the insurance contract exceeds the insured amount for the risk of “theft”, and therefore the court considers it possible to calculate the insurance compensation based on the insured amount specified in the contract.

The calculation of the insurance indemnity presented by the plaintiff was verified by the court and found to be justified, and therefore the unpaid portion of the insurance indemnity in the amount of RUB 400,916 must be recovered from the defendant. 65 kopecks

Also Martynova E.V. requests to recover from the defendant the costs incurred to pay for the report of Aspect LLC No. dated DD.MM.YYYY in the amount of 5150 rubles. (ld. 180). Assessing the necessity and validity of the expenses incurred by the plaintiff, the court believes that these requirements must be satisfied, since the production of a report on the assessment of the market value of the vehicle by the plaintiff was due to the need to protect its rights. In addition, the results of the assessment are close to the results of the forensic examination, and therefore the court considers it possible to recover from the defendant the specified costs in the amount of 5,150 rubles.

Among other things, Martynova E.V. also requests to collect interest for the use of other people's funds for the period from DD.MM.YYYY (deadline for payment of insurance compensation) according to DD.MM.YYYY (date specified in the claim) in the amount of 30,558 rubles. 76 cop., believing that the defendant unreasonably withheld payment of insurance compensation in part.

According to Art. 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - the use of someone else's funds as a result of their unlawful retention, evasion of their return, other delay in their payment or unjustified receipt or savings at the expense of another person is subject to payment of interest on the amount of these funds. The amount of interest is determined by the discount rate of bank interest at the place of residence of the creditor, and if the creditor is a legal entity, at its location on the day of fulfillment of the monetary obligation or its corresponding part. When collecting a debt in court, the court may satisfy the creditor's claim based on the discount rate of bank interest on the day the claim was filed or on the day the decision was made. These rules apply unless a different interest rate is established by law or agreement.

According to the explanations contained in paragraphs 1, 23 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated DD.MM.YYYY No. “On the practice of applying the provisions of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation on interest for the use of other people’s funds” (hereinafter referred to as the Resolution of the Plenum), Art. 395 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation provides for the consequences of non-fulfillment or delay in fulfilling a monetary obligation, by virtue of which the debtor is obligated to pay the money.

The plaintiff determined the period of delay correctly, since the defendant, by virtue of clause 12.3.1 of the Rules, had an obligation to pay insurance compensation in the period from DD.MM.YYYY to DD.MM.YYYY.

Under these circumstances, the demands for the collection of interest for the use of other people's funds are justified, the calculation presented by the court was verified and found to be justified, and therefore funds in the amount of 30,558 rubles are subject to recovery from the defendant. 76 kop.

The defendant's arguments that, by virtue of the provisions of Art. 951 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, interest is not subject to accrual and cannot be taken into account, since the court established that the amount of the insurance compensation paid was unreasonable.

In accordance with Art. 56 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the parties are required to prove the circumstances to which they refer as the basis for their claims or objections. Failure by a party to use the said dispositive right to present objections or evidence in support of them entails a decision being made only on the evidence presented by the other party.

Under these circumstances, the court comes to the conclusion that the plaintiff’s demands are based on the law, and therefore must be satisfied in full.

In accordance with Art. 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the costs associated with the consideration of the case include amounts payable to experts.

As can be seen from the case materials, DD.MM.YYYY an additional forensic examination was appointed, the payment of which was entrusted to the plaintiff (case sheet 158-159).

The plaintiff paid for the examination in the amount of 9,000 rubles. (case file 181).

According to Art. 98 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the court awards the party in whose favor the court decision is made to reimburse the other party for all legal expenses incurred in the case. If the claim is partially satisfied, the legal costs specified in this article are awarded to the plaintiff in proportion to the amount of the claims satisfied by the court, and to the defendant in proportion to the part of the claims that were denied to the plaintiff.

Under these circumstances, from the defendant RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company in favor of Martynova E.V. The costs of conducting a forensic examination in the amount of 9,000 rubles are subject to recovery, as well as the costs of paying the state duty in proportion to the satisfied claims in the amount of 7,566 rubles. 25 kopecks

Based on Art. 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the party in whose favor the court decision was made, at its written request, the court awards, on the other hand, the costs of paying for the services of a representative within reasonable limits.

By virtue of Art. 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, the protection of the rights and legitimate interests of the plaintiff is entrusted to the court, and therefore, applying for protection of interests to the bar is not necessary for the plaintiff.

Since the case file contains written confirmation of the costs incurred by the plaintiff to pay for the services of lawyer V.A. Storublevtsev, and also taking into account that the plaintiff himself did not participate in all court hearings, and also taking into account the number of court hearings held with the participation of the specified representative, the court considers it possible to recover from the defendant in favor of the plaintiff, based on the principle of reasonableness, the costs of paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 20,000 rubles (case sheet 182-183).

Under these circumstances, the court comes to the conclusion that the plaintiff’s demands are based on the law and are justified, and therefore must be satisfied.

Based on the above and guided by Art. Art. 395, 929, 943, 947, 948 Civil Code of the Russian Federation, Art. Art. 12, 55, 56, 67, 94, 98, 100, 194-199 Code of Civil Procedure of the Russian Federation, court

Claims of Martynova E.V. to RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company for the collection of insurance compensation and interest - to satisfy.

To recover from RESO-Garantiya Insurance Company in favor of E.V. Martynova. insurance compensation in the amount of 400916 (four hundred thousand nine hundred sixteen) rubles 65 (sixty-five) kopecks, interest for the use of other people's funds in the amount of 30558 (thirty thousand five hundred fifty-eight) rubles 76 (seventy-six) kopecks, assessment expenses in the amount of 5150 ( five thousand one hundred and fifty) rubles, the cost of paying for a forensic examination in the amount of 9,000 (nine thousand) rubles, the cost of paying the state duty in the amount of 7,566 (seven thousand five hundred sixty-six) rubles 25 (twenty-five) kopecks and the cost of paying for the services of a representative in the amount of 20,000 (twenty thousand) rubles, for a total of 473,191 (four hundred seventy-three thousand one hundred ninety-one) rubles 66 (sixty-six) kopecks.

The decision can be appealed to the St. Petersburg City Court within 10 days by filing a cassation appeal through the Moskovsky District Court of St. Petersburg.

"RESO-Garantiya" is one of the many insurance companies that operate in the Russian Federation. Nowadays, many people seek to insure their lives, their property, and so on. However, desire is one thing, commitment is another. Whether to insure your home or not is a decision that each person makes independently. He can invest money in insurance and receive financial compensation in the event of an accident, or he can rely on luck and hope that nothing happens.

This business is quite profitable for insurance companies such as RESO-Garantiya - payments are usually made not so often, and income is received constantly. But here you should pay attention to such a thing as compulsory motor liability insurance. What it is? If you live in the Russian Federation and own a vehicle, then most likely you already know about this. If not, then you should know that compulsory motor liability insurance is a mandatory insurance policy that will cover the costs of compensating damage to a third party injured due to your fault, be it vehicle repair, treatment or funeral. What makes this policy stand out is that it is mandatory, that is, every car owner must insure it under MTPL. And, naturally, the question arises - where to turn?

There are a large number of different insurance companies, however, as you may have already understood, in this article we are talking about the RESO-Garantiya company. Payments are what every car owner is primarily interested in, since this parameter is often the key one. That is why this article will describe everything you need to know about payments under MTPL and other policies of the RESO-Garantiya company.

Calculation of the amount of insurance payment: what is taken into account

So, the first thing that interests every person is how exactly the amounts for the insurance of the RESO-Garantia company are calculated? Payments in this case are calculated according to a standardized formula without introducing any personal elements. Factors taken into account include the country in which your car was manufactured, the amount of use and wear and tear of the car, and the region of insurance.

This may be unexpected, but different regions of the country have different coefficients, so do not be surprised if payments in one district of the Russian Federation are higher than in another, despite all other indicators being equal. Accordingly, the payment calculation system is as transparent as possible, and if necessary, you can clarify all the details with a specialist. But you won’t need this, since at RESO-Garantiya, payments never raise questions for any clients.

Payments for damaged car parts

Many users are wondering in what cases they can count on insurance payments. RESO-Garantiya is a large insurance company that has too large a customer base to try to deceive anyone for profit. This way, you can trust what the experts tell you.

In this case, when it comes to damage to any element of your car in a traffic accident, much depends on the condition in which this part was. For example, if you already had a dented bumper that was further damaged in an accident, then you will not be paid. The wear and tear of the car is also taken into account: if your car is many years old, then the payments will accordingly be lower - up to fifty percent with a lot of wear and tear. If you are repairing or replacing a particular spare part, then you should definitely keep all the relevant documents and proof of payment. Then you can submit these documents to the insurance company, which will affect the final payments. RESO-Garantiya is a company that takes absolutely every detail into account, so if you can prove that your bumper was new at the time of the accident, then you will be reimbursed for the full cost of the part, its repair and installation.

Payment information and receipt

There is another very important point in the issue of insurance - obtaining information on payments. Many people are lost because they cannot figure out what payments they are entitled to, what they can claim, how to get it, how to find out about all this, and so on. Naturally, this is a common problem, because people, most often, are not lawyers or highly specialized specialists to understand absolutely everything. This is why they turn to professional companies and this is where you need to be careful.

Since insurance has recently become a very popular and relevant field of activity in the Russian Federation, you may accidentally turn to an unreliable specialist who will try to deceive you. This will not happen if you contact a large, trusted company that has an office, a customer base, and a full-fledged payment center. "RESO-Garantiya" is one of the largest insurance companies in the Russian Federation, so you can safely contact its employees to get all the necessary information about your policy and payments under it.

Reviews from users who contacted this insurer prove this fact - the specialists working at RESO-Garantiya are professionals in their field, working for the benefit of the client. So, if you have your policy number, which you receive in the office, by email and even by SMS, then you will be able to receive full support for any incident covered under your insurance. To receive the promised funds, you will only need to contact the official payment center “RESO-Garantiya” - no “murky” schemes, complete formality and transparency, which is what people in this company appreciate and are quick to note in their positive reviews.

Amounts of payments and penalties in excess of the norm

So, now you know how to find out the payment from RESO-Garantiya: to do this, you need to contact the company directly, since there is no specific amount. Payments are calculated taking into account all the circumstances, the condition of your car, its wear and tear, as well as many other factors. The most important thing you should know is that if you become a third party in a traffic accident, that is, you find yourself injured, then you may be paid up to 400 thousand rubles from the policy of the at-fault driver. At the same time, as mentioned above, absolutely every little detail is taken into account - the condition of your car before the accident is studied according to the documents, the wear of all damaged parts, and if they were already damaged before the accident, compensation for replacement or repair may be excluded from insurance payments.

Therefore, you should contact RESO-Garantiya - the payment terms here are more than acceptable, but the insurer will impartially consider all the details of the case and will not try to reduce the amount of payments, as small and unverified companies do that lure clients with supposedly profitable offers. It is better to overpay a little, but then have confidence that you will receive your insurance payment. If we are talking about the fact that you damaged a third party’s car, then compulsory motor liability insurance plays into your hands in that the insurance company will pay all the costs of compensating the victim, otherwise you might be asked to voluntarily give money for repairs, and if you refused , they would try to do this through the courts.

Please note that you can also go to court to receive compensation on top of what was paid under compulsory motor liability insurance - but for this you must have the appropriate grounds.

OSAGO and CASCO - what is it?

Separately, it is worth paying attention to payments under CASCO - "RESO-Garantiya" issues insurance policies of both types, however, novice motorists are not always able to understand what each of them is. You can write a lot on this topic, but now it’s important to just get a general idea of ​​what each of the policies covers, so that you don’t have questions when you want to receive payments under compulsory motor insurance or payments under CASCO. "RESO-Garantiya" deals with insurance at a professional level, so you can find out all the details on the spot, but first you need to have basic knowledge.

So, CASCO is an insurance policy that you take out to insure your own car in case of damage in a traffic accident. Everything here is quite simple: you get into an accident - and you turn to the insurer so that it pays for repairs or simply pays a certain insurance compensation, the amount of which, as you may already understand, depends on many factors.

Differences between OSAGO and CASCO

With compulsory motor liability insurance, everything is not so simple - many motorists do not fully understand what kind of policy it is. With it, you insure your liability as a driver in case of traffic accidents that occur between two or more vehicles. What does this mean? This means that CASCO covers the damage your car receives in an accident, and MTPL covers the damage you cause to other participants in the accident. Accordingly, at RESO-Garantiya you receive insurance payments under CASCO, and under OSAGO - the person who suffered damage due to your fault.

The importance of official registration

If you are bound by contractual obligations with RESO-Garantiya, the company’s payment department will always be open to you. However, you need to make sure that you are purchasing a policy from this company and not from any other or, even worse, from a scammer. User reviews on the Internet (both on the company’s website and on some other resources) have repeatedly indicated that car owners appeared in the RESO-Garantiya payment department, trying to obtain payment under an insurance policy that simply was not in the company’s database .

The problem here is that scammers very often turn to naive citizens, offering to quickly, cheaply and effectively issue an insurance policy, hiding behind the names of large companies such as RESO-Garantiya. As a result, the car owner pays for the insurance, but cannot claim payment from the insurer because the insurer does not cooperate with this car owner. So be extremely careful and do not agree to offers coming from unverified sources.

If you want to issue an insurance policy with a guarantee of insurance payments, then you should do this only in the office of the RESO-Garantiya company or on the company’s official website. Otherwise, you will have to try to collect all payments in court - RESO-Garantiya will not be able to cover your expenses if your policy is not listed in the company’s database.