Insurance companies insist on a rise in the cost of the CTP insurance policy at least one and a half times. The issue is not so secondary that, on behalf of the president of the country, his assistant Elvira Nabiullina gathered interested parties for a meeting. Insurance companies insist on a rise in the cost of the CTP insurance policy at least one and a half times. The issue is not so secondary that, on behalf of the president of the country, his assistant Elvira Nabiullina gathered interested parties for a meeting
It's easier to break bones
The insidiousness of insurers is inexhaustible, it manifests itself even within the walls of the building of the Presidential Administration! So that the reader is convinced that this is not a causeless outburst of emotions, let us say a few words about the background of the discussion.
For an incomplete year, the number of legal cases in the country for compensation for OSAGO losses jumped threefold, the share of claims against insurance companies (IC) for underpayments after an accident reached a third in the total mass of claims for all types of insurance (there are dozens from ankle fractures on ice to space launches)
The jump happened here why.
For every penny to reimburse "automobile" losses, insurance companies always stood to death. And not without success, since they were “playing up” to the flaws in the legislation, more precisely, even one flaw.
Responsibility to respond to legal claims was assigned to strictly defined territorial representations of certain ICs. And if the car owner, living, for example, in Novokuznetsk, in the local branch of the insurance company, was underpaid for compulsory motor third-party liability insurance, the infringed person could go to court only at the location of the authorized representative office … in Grozny. To initiate claims for distant lands is more expensive for yourself! Because almost no one was suing.
Better you to us
But last spring, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation clarified: claims for compulsory motor third-party liability insurance fall under the principles of the law “On Protection of Consumer Rights”, which means that they can be considered in courts at the location of the plaintiffs. And now the respondent companies must "go to the Mohammedans." What is unprofitable - how many business travelers!
And this is not the last expense. Kohl many times more lawsuits, there were more lost cases. Hence, the total payments for insured events increased. In addition, I had to increase the staff of SK lawyers - God forbid anyone, too.
And that's not it. The lawyers employed by the plaintiff motorists, having won the lawsuit, are suing the SK in full, with the expectation of increased remuneration in their favor. It comes to … half the amount of the claim. Insurers claim that on this basis even a special branch of business has developed - the Osagovskaya advocacy.
Here it’s just right to sympathize with the insurers and believe their complaints: compulsory motor third-party liability insurance is practically non-profitable - only troubles. But knowledgeable people will reassure your conscience: non-profit … compared to income from other types of insurance. And so - they will not be lost.
To give here the figure of the debit-credit for compulsory motor third-party liability insurance for the past year, but now they have not yet managed to knock out the money. But an analogy comes to mind. A couple of years ago, insurers, again referring to the poverty of working with the “auto citizen,” insisted: so that we can breathe, we must take into account the wear of parts when calculating insurance payments. But it turned out that over the previous year 2009, 37.3 billion rubles remained in the accounts of insurance companies after paying compensation to the victims. Now let's see the process in dynamics. According to the documents available in the editorial board of Za rulyom. RF, in 2011 112 insurance companies paid 54.4 billion rubles for insured events and received insurance premiums of 103.7 billion rubles. Of the difference of 49.3 billion, of course, they paid taxes, paid off employees, landlords, paid overhead expenses … And for sure there was enough left over to not be too zealous in complaints about the difficulties of life.
Accident
We read between the lines
But back to the walls of the Presidential Administration. Representatives of the press were not invited to the conversation, and the editors of Za rulyom. RF asked to tell about it a participant - Sergei Kanayev, head of the National Public Center for Traffic Safety at the Russian Federation of Car Owners.
It would seem that the surest way to reduce the increased costs of the UK is to start paying fair amounts of compensation in order to avoid additional costs in the courts. However, insurers came to the meeting with the presidential aide with a package of proposals of a different property. For an unprepared ear, they are perceived as harmless. At least: remove the claims of insurance under compulsory motor third-party liability insurance from the scope of the law on consumer rights. But we already imagine what is behind it.
Another proposal would not seem harmless: to raise tariffs for policies, given, insurers explain, the low profitability of the “auto citizen”. And even more so, prices need to be raised because, according to the bill that the State Duma is going to consider, the maximum amount of compensation for damaged property should increase from the current 120 thousand to 400 thousand rubles. The conclusion follows: insurance premiums in favor of the UK need to be raised by 30%.
Again, it seems, justified. But there is such data. The number of serious accidents requiring compensation close to the limit is only 15% of all. And many more insured do not get into an accident and do not apply for compensation. It is difficult for us to compare the amounts issued and remaining on the accounts of the UK - insurance companies are not inclined to popularize them. But only they can be convinced that the guesses of car owners are groundless.
How will the president calm down? Yes, nothing
The bill on compulsory motor third-party liability insurance, which is in the State Duma, also provides for the growth of insurance payments for health damage - from the current 160 thousand to 500 thousand for each victim. So, the tariff for this type of insurance, they say, needs to be raised by another 30% … What can I object to about the same thing: far from all, after the accident, thank God, they need a health amendment, especially “for all the money”. A third rate increase proposed by insurers - not too much?
But “on a trailer” for this proposal, said Sergey Kanaev, insurers brought one more to the office on Old Square. Give compensation for the death of the insured only if it is the loss of the breadwinner and the dependents are left without sources of livelihood. And just family members do not pay anything. If you want everyone to receive insurance payments, you need to raise tariffs by another 9%.
Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation Elvira Nabiullina Assistant to the President of the Russian Federation Elvira Nabiullina
- So how much do you think will need to raise the cost of compulsory motor liability insurance? - asked Elvira Nabiullina.
- At least 50 percent.
- So what happens, the president, worried about the surge in OSAGO lawsuits, gave an order to sort out the situation so that there were no dissatisfied ones. But your suggestions can only aggravate the situation …
Without bargaining
“You won’t have to bargain about the cost of compulsory motor third-party liability insurance if both sides of the insurance contract start calculating compensation amounts in the general measurement system,” said Sergey Kanaev about what he said at the meeting. - Disagreements arise when, according to an expert working on a salary of the UK, the amount payable is minimal, and an independent examination on the order of the insured shows a large amount. Because they use different assessment methods. It is necessary to introduce a unified, prescribed by law, which would be subject to all experts, regardless of subordination. Then there would not even have arisen the likelihood of discrepancies, including from tricky drivers who - and there are - would like to profit from the UK.
The "ceiling" of the amounts of compensation, no doubt, it is necessary to raise. But it does not follow from this that it is required to automatically increase the cost of the compulsory insurance policy - there is an additional insurance service. Having paid one or two thousand rubles, the driver will raise the amount of compensation payments to at least a million and will be calm: you don’t have to hang out with insurers for the extra 10-20 thousand. But these surcharges can not be replaced by obligations - it will be too easy for drivers to flow into the accounts of the UK. They should be left voluntary: the first-year driver on a decent foreign car will probably want to pay extra, but an experienced uncle with 20 years of experience will think it, forced to count money. And in the insurance community a normal competitive environment will develop: when tariffs for policies do not increase as required, it will be better for colleagues to explain that voluntary surcharge is good.
Sergey Kanaev
Sergey Kanaev, head of the National Public Center for Traffic Safety at the FAR Sergey Kanaev, head of the National Public Center for Traffic Safety at the FAR
