Gesetz der Straße: Versicherung darf Mietwagenkosten nicht pauschal kürzen
Nach einem unverschuldeten Unfall muss ein Auto in die Werkstatt, ein Ersatzwagen muss her. Die Mietwagenkosten will die gegnerische Versicherung aber nicht voll tragen. Was ein Gericht urteilt.
The decision of the Amtsgericht Bad Kissingen in Germany (Az.: 72 C 89/26) has shed light on a crucial matter concerning insurance companies and their handling of car rental costs during disputes. The court ruled that insurance providers cannot arbitrarily reduce car rental expenses based on an alleged unfavorable basis, such as the Schwacke-Liste. This ruling was made evident by the ADAC, an automobile club.
According to the court, the decisive factor is whether the chosen estimation basis accurately reflects the local market conditions in a specific case. The insurance company in question was contesting the reimbursement of car rental expenses, which amounted to approximately €1,376, for a female driver involved in an unintentional traffic accident. The woman had rented a replacement vehicle for nearly two weeks, and the court found that the costs were reasonable and typical for the area.
The insurance company attempted to reduce the reimbursement using the Fraunhofer Mietpreisspiegel, a market price list, but the court disagreed, stating that this list may be inflated. The case went to court because the woman's legal team argued that the costs were not inflated but rather representative of the local market. The court emphasized that when there is a dispute over costs, the judge must determine if the chosen estimation basis correctly reflects the local market conditions in that particular case.
The Fraunhofer market price list often presents lower car rental prices than the Schwacke-Liste, according to legal experts, who attribute this difference to varying data collection methods. However, the choice of which list to use in court ultimately depends on the specific circumstances of each case. The court ultimately upheld the Schwacke-Liste as a valid estimation basis, noting that the insurance company could not provide concrete evidence showing that the chosen basis did not accurately reflect the local market conditions.
Consequently, the court ordered the insurance company to pay the remaining reimbursement amount to the woman.
Written by urgent.news from Handelsblatt's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — it may contain errors, so check the original before relying on it.
