Blog

After an accident (the other side admitted guilt) my report was shortened by 1200€ by the opposing insurance company with the reference that my car was not completely serviced by the BMW dealer. The fact is that after the purchase of the car all repairs (the last one was only a month ago) were made by me at BMW, only the small inspection was done once at a free workshop, two months after the Tüv over BMW. In this small inspection nothing was repaired. Lawyer thinks that the courts (BGH judgement) only ask the liability insurance companies to pay the full sum of a brand workshop in the case of fictitious billing if they keep a checkbook. By the way, the first owner didn’t always wait for the car at BMW, but that can’t be accused of it, can it? Do I really have such bad cards? What do you think?

Hello together, I hope I’m right here in the section, otherwise please move! have a vehicle with Audi used car warranty Plus. To do this you have to have service/inspection (repair also?) done in a VW workshop so that the warranty remains. I soon have a service check at such a workshop again and already know that the brakes (dishes and receipts) have to be made new. So if they carry out the check and say that the brakes are new chambered I have to do this with you (or a VW partner workshop) or can I change it myself without losing my used car warranty plus. Or would it be advisable to change the brakes before the inspection so that the topic does not occur at all. Hope you know what I mean! Make your own brakes = guarantee away? Let the brakes be made at VW workshop = guarantee remains? Thank you for your help!

Hello, I had already written in the Punto Forum, one of us drove on our parked car and has caused a “eigtl.” Total damage, the liability is clear, according to HDI KV from the Fiat AH I submitted, but they want an expert report, the expert I ordered and he was there this morning, the values I get tomorrow or Wednesday. Now I have read much neg. about the HDI, now totally shot that they pull everything into the length. How are your experiences? Or should I immediately a I’ve heard that they always make a counter-assessment? LG Curly

At the end of November 2014 I was driven up by someone waiting at a red traffic light. Since I could not detect any damage at first I left it while photographing the license plate and changing mobile phone number. Only 8 days later I noticed that the bumper is about 2 cm on the side. Since my free workshop did not want to regulate the damage due to pre-damage (cratter) without expert I agreed to the damage of an expert of the insurance However, the victim does not communicate with his insurance so that I now have a refusal of regulation by the opposing insurance company, because I cannot provide any evidence of participation. I have no witnesses, it has not been received by the police. If I call the opponent, he does not doubt the fact, but that it has been harmed. I am not covered by legal protection. I don’t know if it makes sense to hire a lawyer, as long as I can’t prove the fact that I’m supposed to cut this thing off under apprenticeship. Next time I don’t have any police if I don’t have any witnesses.

Hello, there is the possibility for many insurance companies to negotiate a so-called discount protection, in which one is not reclassified in the damage-free class in the case of a maximum of one accident per year. However, if one changes the insurance, this discount protection expires, because the previous insurance of the new insurance informs the “regular” damage-free years. That is, the protection obtained with the previous insurance no longer applies and one will with the new insurance The new insurance also takes into account all accidents of the past and ranks the new customer correspondingly high with the number of non-harmful years (formally, the old insurance actually ranks high one second before the change and informs the new high SF class of the new insurance). On the basis of the above explanation, therefore, a policyholder after an accident rarely has an employee. The change would only be worthwhile if he had an extremely expensive insurance so far and the new insurance would still be cheaper despite the increase. The discount protection is bought by higher premiums. An insurance without a discount protection is always cheaper than an insurance with a discount protection. Until the damage occurs, the customer therefore pays more than he or she has to pay. As a result, you have to look for a new insurance policy and you have to be upgraded in spite of the discount protection. Then you would have paid your discount protection (in the form of a higher premium) completely free of charge and the insurance cover would have to be paid for all these years (in the form of a higher premium). In other places it can be read many times that the insurance by the discount protection wants to bind the customer to itself in the long term, because after a damage case he will now have no special interest in a change (as a higher classification threatens). This argument is contradictory insofar as hardly an insurance will have a longer-term interest in a customer, which makes regular insurance payments necessary. In any event, if an insurance company cancels after a damage event or not. As far as can be seen, it is entitled to terminate. Thus, the policyholder enters into the hands of the insurance company, which is always profit-oriented. Even at the time of conclusion of the contract, the customer can never be sure whether he can actually use his discount protection in the event of damage. Moreover, the rumor persists for decades that all insurance companies in the Sc hadensfall strive to limit their services to a minimum. Discount protection – Just a marketing trap?