Deputy Yaroslav Nilov prepared amendments that would oblige insurance companies to always file a recourse claim against those responsible for accidents with aggravating circumstances — drunk drivers, violators without rights, and those who fled the scene of the accident. Dmitry Slavnov, auto lawyer, forensic auto expert, head of the Avtolikbez company, explained to "Pervy Technicheskiy" why this approach is only half the solution.
The parliamentarian noted in the text of the bill that an accident is not an ordinary traffic accident, but a reason for harsh measures of responsibility, including material ones. Currently, insurers have the right, but are not obligated, to recover payments from those responsible, even if there is an OSAGO policy.
According to the deputy, the new approach will exclude the "shifting of the risks of unscrupulous policyholders to other car owners."
Slavnov supports the idea of strengthening responsibility, but considers a comprehensive approach necessary. He recalled that insurance companies already have the right of recourse.
If a person does not have a driver's license, then he has no right to drive at all, and transferring the car to such a driver is already the responsibility of the owner. But if there is an OSAGO policy, the insurance company will still pay, and then in recourse will demand from the perpetrator.
The human rights activist recalled that if the driver fled the scene of the accident or was intoxicated, the insurance company will pay, and then recover from him in full. But now payments are made according to a single methodology, taking into account depreciation, they are always not enough, so the victims almost always turn to the perpetrator for compensation for new spare parts.
Maybe it's easier to prescribe that in case of drunkenness, lack of rights or escape, the insurance company should refuse to pay immediately, and then the victim recovers directly from the perpetrator.
The auto lawyer also pointed out another systemic problem of recovery. If the situation develops in such a way that the perpetrator is a visitor, without insurance, rights and drunk, then you will have to recover funds at his place of registration.
Or it's Vanka from the village — he drinks, drives without rights, crashes the car, and he has no money — and he doesn't care. He will say: “I have no money, take what you want, here is a tractor, only one wheel is left from it”. If such an asocial driver without insurance, rights and in a state of intoxication gets into an accident, his vehicle must be seized, and not just increase fines.
Slavnov added that any amendments should balance the guarantee of payments to victims and the real possibility of recovering damages.
