Loading...
CCTV News (Reporter/Yang Yifei): Because an electric car owner fell "contactlessly" near the vehicle she was driving, Ms. Yang was asked for compensation by the other party.
Ms. Yang said that when she was turning right at an intersection, an electric car driver suddenly fell behind her car. An aunt riding an electric car sat down on the ground all at once. I checked and found that the vehicle was not damaged, so I asked my aunt where the specific collision point was, but my aunt said that she couldn't stand up and couldn't remember whether she really hit the vehicle at that time, so I asked her to slow down and then call the police. ”
The next day, Ms. Yang went to the traffic police center to deal with the accident. The surveillance video shows that the vehicles of the two sides did not collide, but the traffic police said that they should give way and go straight when turning right during the driving process, so Ms. Yang was determined to be fully responsible.
"The content displayed on my dashcam is too biased and unclear, but I can see that my aunt fell at the intersection after riding more than two electric vehicles, and she may also have a problem with changing speeds. Ms. Yang said, "The first time I had an accident after driving a car for 7 years, there was no contact between the two parties, and I really felt wronged." ”
(Provided by the interviewee)
Ms. Chi, from Beijing, was also involved in a non-contact traffic accident. Ms. Chi recalled to the "News+" reporter: "On a snowy day in December 2023, a motor vehicle was driving on the road faster than other vehicles. ”
Ms. Chi said that she did not know about non-contact traffic accidents before encountering such incidents, and only thought that she was unlucky when the incident occurred. "Later, my family reminded me that my accident situation might be eligible for a non-contact traffic accident, so I thought of calling the police to protect my rights. However, after the relevant person in charge of the inquiry and monitoring, it was determined that the motor vehicle was too far away from the place where I fell at the time, and the owner could not be held responsible. It's too difficult to defend your rights against contactless accidents. ”
Due to the suddenness of the incident, Ms. Chi did not obtain other evidence to corroborate, so the matter had to be closed.
"Contact" is not a prerequisite for liability for traffic accidents
Zheng Xiang, a professor at Beijing Jiaotong University Law School, said that the Road Traffic Safety Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that a traffic accident refers to an incident in which a vehicle is injured or injured or damaged by property due to fault or accident on the road. A non-contact traffic accident is a situation in which there is no contact between a vehicle and a pedestrian or non-motorized vehicle, but the accident still occurs.
"This situation is usually caused by the formation of a road obstacle in the process of vehicle or pedestrian passage on the road, and the victim feels the obstacle, is frightened or does not brake in time, causing self-damage, resulting in an accident. Zheng Xiang explained, "Contact is not a prerequisite for liability for traffic accidents, and the occurrence of accidents emphasizes that the parties have subjective fault in the causal relationship, and fault certainly includes intentional or negligent fault." As long as there is a causal relationship between the actions of the parties and the traffic accident, they will bear the corresponding responsibility. ”
How to determine liability for non-contact traffic accidents?
Zheng Xiang believes that the standard of liability for non-contact accidents is the same as that for general road traffic accidents, that is, the fault of the parties is considered. In such incidents, it is necessary to make a comprehensive determination based on the facts of the case and evidence, considering the degree of fault of the accident party and the causal relationship between the act and the result of the damage. If both parties are at fault, the damage should be distributed according to the degree of duty of care of both parties to the traffic accident, the degree of danger of the motor vehicle, and the ability to avoid danger.
"In this process, whether the motor vehicle is driving in compliance is one of the criteria. For example, if a pedestrian or non-motorized vehicle owner suddenly stops in a motorized lane, and the motorized vehicle owner is passing normally, his or her responsibility will be relatively reduced. However, if the owner of the motor vehicle himself is also at fault, although he has slowly stopped, but because of the sudden stop, the traffic obstacle, the owner of the motor vehicle is also illegal parking, and he must also bear the corresponding responsibility. Zheng Xiang said.
In addition, according to the Road Traffic Safety Law, if the driver or pedestrian of the non-motor vehicle is not at fault, the motor vehicle party shall be liable for compensation if the accident involving a motor vehicle and a non-motor vehicle is not at fault. If it can be proved that the driver or pedestrian of the non-motor vehicle is at fault, the liability of the motor vehicle party shall be appropriately reduced according to the degree of fault. If the motor vehicle party is not at fault at all, but considering the principle of fairness, the motor vehicle party is also required to bear no more than 10% of the compensation liability. This is also the embodiment of the principle of the burden of danger on the superior. ”
But this principle has also raised public concerns about the problem of "touching porcelain".
In Zheng Xiang's view, the basic principle of tort liability judgment that "whoever is more capable of preventing accidents will bear more responsibility for accidents" is specifically applied to the field of road traffic accidents, which is more conducive to the victims to obtain better relief and solve the problem. However, this does not mean that the owner of the motor vehicle is completely in a disadvantaged position, and if it is determined that the accident was intentionally caused by a non-motor vehicle driver or pedestrian, the motor vehicle party is not liable for compensation.
Non-contact traffic accidents fall under the scope of insurance claims
According to past cases, after a non-contact accident occurs, some insurance companies will refuse to bear the liability for compensation on the grounds that there was no physical damage to the vehicle and that the injured person was injured and that the person concerned was not involved.
Zheng Xiang said that in the event of a non-contact accident, the insurance company should bear the liability for compensation, and there are also relevant regulations on the compensation sequence of insurance. "If the owner of the car is insured with compulsory insurance and commercial insurance at the same time, according to the current laws and regulations of our country, the first is borne by the insurance company of compulsory insurance, but because there is a limit of compulsory insurance, if there are other losses, the part exceeding the limit can be borne by commercial insurance. If the amount of commercial insurance is insufficient, the infringer shall be liable. ”
What should I do if I dispute the outcome of a no-contact traffic accident?
Zheng Xiang believes that for non-contact traffic accidents, the most important thing is for both parties to retain relevant evidence, try to restore the real situation of traffic accidents, and help traffic police understand the composition of traffic accidents and distinguish causal relationships through evidence.
In addition, the party who has already obtained the road traffic accident liability letter but still has objections can still continue to file a lawsuit. "The road traffic accident liability letter is a document for the public security traffic management department to characterize whether the parties to the traffic accident have violated the rules and regulations, as well as the causal relationship between the violation and the damage consequences of the traffic accident. It is a basis, but not the sole basis for the allocation of liability for tort damages. It is not an administrative decision per se, and the judgment of tort liability and the legal basis involved are different. Zheng Xiang said.