Contact center
(from Russia)
ext 00020 (from abroad)
Monday - Friday from 8:00 to 20:00 (Moscow time), except public holidays, free call from regions of Russia
15 august 2022, 14:37
In the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) practice there are cases when the insurance company texts its client about the organization of repairs under the policy of Compulsory Motor TPL and regards this method as a full-fledged referral to the vehicle service station for repairs under the insurance indemnity in kind. This was reported by Financial Ombudsman Svetlana Maximova.
According to Svetlana Maximova, for example, an accident involving a Ford Focus and a Mercedes-Benz occurred in Belgorod. The traffic accident participants drew up an E-Protocol. The owner of the Mercedes-Benz applied to her insurance company for compensation. The insurer organized an inspection of the damaged car and, based on its results, texted a notification to the claimant’s mobile phone number to organize a repair instead of sending a full-fledged repair referral. “Having failed to receive a full-fledged referral within the statutory time limit, the complainant demanded compensation from the insurance company in cash, to which she was entitled under the law. But the company refused the claim referring to the fact that the claimant had been issued a repair voucher,” Svetlana Maximova said.
The Financial Ombudsman, to whom the injured party subsequently applied, based on the fact that the insurer had not issued a repair voucher to the insured, recovered the insurance indemnity from the company.
“Proper issue of a direction to repair is deemed to be sending or delivering to the consumer a document (direction to repair) containing all the necessary information within the 20-day period specified by law,” the Financial Ombudsman said.
According to the Regulations of the Bank of Russia “On the rules of compulsory insurance of civil liability of vehicle owners” (paragraph 4.22), the insurance company must give the injured party a direction to the repair or send a written notice of refusal to issue a direction for repairs with the reasons for refusal. The referral must contain a number of details (about the injured party, the CMTPL insurance contract, the car itself, etc.).
In accordance with the Resolution of the Plenum of the Russian Supreme Court of 23.06.2015 No. 25 “On application by the courts of certain provisions of Section I of Part I of the Russian Civil Code” a legally binding notice addressed to a citizen must be sent to the address of their registration at their place of residence or stay or to the address which the citizen has indicated, or to their representative.
“Thus, the issuance of a repair order is to be understood as the delivery of the said document to the consumer in person or sending it by post or by other means of sending that allow to establish the fact of its receipt. Accordingly, the financial institution, by texting an sms-notification of the issuance of the repair request, has only informed the consumer of the issuance of the request to the service station, without issuing such a request,’ Svetlana Maximova summarized.
The Financial Ombudsman’s decision was supported by the courts: appeal definition of the Belgorod Regional Court of 23.03.2021 in case number 33-1550/2021, the appeal decision of the Moscow City Court of 16.02.2021 in case number 33-7169/2021, upheld by the ruling of the Second Appeal Court of General Jurisdiction of 29.06.2021 in case number 8G-10256/2021.
