Brief of the case

    It turned out that Chen Mou met the car seller Liao Mou because of the purchase of vehicles involved in the case, and because he knew that he had a way to buy insurance through others, he entrusted him to buy the traffic force insurance and driver accident insurance for the next year of the vehicles involved in the case in 2022, and paid the premium of 220 yuan through wechat transfer.

    Liao immediately transferred Chen's information and premium 220 yuan to Yan, who has been engaged in buying insurance for a long time. After receiving the message, Yan sent the information and transfer to the insurance buying group. Because of miscellaneous messages in the group, Chen's information was ignored. When Yan was inquiring about Chen's insurance buying situation, he accidentally found the electronic insurance policy of the vehicle involved in the insurance buying group from 2021 to 2022, and mistakenly sent the expired insurance policy to Liao as the latest insurance policy wechat, and Liao forwarded the insurance policy to Chen on the same day. 3 people did not carefully check the policy, Chen thought that he had successfully insured the vehicle. 

    Chen claimed that due to Liao and Yan's behavior, the vehicles involved in the case failed to actually insure traffic force insurance, and then made them bear part of the losses that should have been claimed by traffic force insurance, so the case was filed.

Court hearing

    The Bishan District Court of Chongqing held that Chen, knowing that Liao himself could not directly purchase insurance, still delivered relevant information and costs to him, which should be regarded as Chen made a general entrusting to Liao on the purchase of insurance affairs, and the two sides established a free entrusting contract relationship. Given that Liao has timely forwarded the information and expenses to Yan, who has been engaged in the insurance business for a long time, and there is no fault of selecting or instructing a third party, it should not be liable for Chen's losses. Liao transferred the vehicle insurance affairs involved in the case to Yan, formed a legal relationship with Yan, and the result of Yan's handling of entrusted affairs should be attributed to Chen. As the third party entrusted, Yan has been engaged in the insurance business for a long time, and has not fulfilled the duty of careful attention in the process of completing the entrusted affairs involved in the case, and has gross negligence, and should be liable for the loss of Chen. 

    Chen, as the owner and manager of the vehicle involved in the case, has the obligation to insure the vehicle involved in the case, but he did not find that the vehicle involved in the case was not successfully insured within nearly a year before the accident, and there are obvious faults of his own, which can reduce Yan's liability according to law. 

    According to the fault degree of Chen and Yan, the court decided that Yan should bear 60% responsibility for Chen's loss, and the remaining 40% responsibility should be borne by Chen himself. The judgment has now come into force.

Judge's note

    In the insurance market, due to the limited insurance knowledge of the owner and the lack of insurance energy, the phenomenon of insurance agent is very common, and the layers of entrustment aggravate the risk of insurance non-standard. On the one hand, the car owner needs to pay attention to the insurance result, to avoid the vehicle insurance aggravates the property risk; On the other hand, the trustee should fulfill the necessary duty of careful attention, if the loss of the principal is caused by intention or gross negligence, even if no compensation is received, it may face the risk of the principal's claim.

    This article is transferred from the "Shandong High Law" wechat public number, thank you!