#长文创作激励计划#
Netizen Ran Mozhou published an article on the headline "The unleashed puppy was hit and killed and the claim of 3800 was rejected and called the police, asking to admit full responsibility and take compulsory insurance!" The author said in the article:
Zhejiang guy blogger "Spider Man" posted a video on June 22, "Can a dog running at my car without a leash be held responsible?" It aroused the attention of netizens. (Briefly quoted below)
Spider Man said: I drove and saw a man in front of me crossing the zebra crossing alone, and suddenly felt the car jolt. The man on the zebra crossing suddenly turned around and exclaimed, pointing at the blogger's wheel. The blogger braked and stopped, and found a puppy running out of the right side of the car, and the man in front of him was holding a dog leash in his hand. Apparently, the driver rolled the man's unleashed puppy! The driver was glad that the dog was okay, but before he could think about it, the dog suddenly collapsed and died after struggling for a while.
The driver apologized to the owner of the dog, because it was a young French bulldog that was hit and killed by the car, and the dog was very small, and he really didn't see it in the driver's blind spot!
The dog owner said: "My puppy bought it for 5,800 yuan, and you have to pay at least 3,800 yuan." ”
The driver said: "Your puppy is not on a leash, and he runs under my wheel, and I will compensate you up to 1,000 yuan." ”
The dog owner laughed and said: Pay a thousand? You're too young, young man! ”
After the two sides called the police, the traffic police came to the scene and learned that the difference between the dog's owner asking for compensation of 3,800 yuan and the driver's agreement to compensate 1,000 yuan was a bit big. Compulsory traffic insurance can pay 2,000 yuan. ”
It seems that the traffic police who came out of the scene did not want to act in accordance with the law, and wanted to deceive the insurance company to pay more money to settle the matter. Because of the provisions of compulsory motor vehicle insurance, when the insured is responsible for an accident involving a vehicle driven by a vehicle, the limit of compensation for property damage is 2,000 yuan. If the traffic police department issues a traffic accident liability determination confirming that the driver bears full responsibility, the insurance company can only compensate according to the upper limit of 2,000 yuan.
The driver didn't want to be troublesome and agreed to the advice of the traffic police. However, when the traffic police wanted to issue an accident certificate, it was found that the puppy that was hit did not have a dog license, and the traffic police could not issue an accident responsibility certificate. Since the dog owner did not agree with the driver to only compensate 1,000 yuan, the two parties could not mediate, and the traffic police could only not deal with it.
After reading the article, the author believes that this case is worth studying.
First of all, if a dog is hit and killed by a car, is it a traffic accident? As law enforcement officers, the traffic police must first understand this fact.
Judging from the facts of the case, although the dog owner was on the zebra crossing, although he was holding a leash, the dog was not leashed across the road, and when the dog crossed the road, it was in the blind spot of the car driver. The car has just started and the speed limit has not been exceeded.
Article 1 of the Road Traffic Safety Law does not include dogs and other animals, that is, dogs are not within the scope of the adjustment of the Road Traffic Safety Law. Article 1 of the Road Traffic Safety Law protects the property safety and other legitimate rights and interests of citizens, legal persons and other organizations. If a citizen's property is lost in a traffic accident, it is necessary to see whether the owner of the property is a party to the traffic accident and whether the owner of the property is at fault in the accident.
Article 2 of the Road Traffic Safety Law stipulates that 'vehicle drivers, pedestrians, passengers, and units and individuals related to road traffic activities shall abide by this Law. According to this provision, units and individuals do not include dogs. Even if the owner of the car hit and killed the dog, it is not possible to use this law to regulate the driver's behavior.
Article 60 of the Road Traffic Safety Law stipulates that tamed livestock shall be used to drive animal-powered vehicles; When driving an animal-powered vehicle across the road, the driver should get out of the vehicle and pull the livestock; When the driver leaves the vehicle, he shall keep the animal on a leash.
Although there is no provision in this law for people to take dogs across the crossing, it should refer to this provision when leading dogs across the crossing. The owner of the dog did not leash the dog and let the dog run on the road, and the owner of the dog should bear the responsibility for the dog being run to death, and the driver is obviously not responsible.
In this case of the dog being hit and killed by a car, the traffic police could not issue a traffic accident liability determination because the dog was unlicensed, and conversely, if the dog had a license, could the traffic police issue a traffic accident liability determination? The traffic police officer in the article is obviously suspected of abusing his power, and if he issues a traffic accident liability determination, it is likely to be a joke, and at the same time suspected of helping the party to defraud insurance.
Although it is an accident for a car to crush a dog, it is not a traffic accident under the law. The road traffic law of the mainland regulates the road traffic accident relationship between motor vehicles and motor vehicles, motor vehicles and non-motor vehicles, non-motor vehicles and non-motor vehicles, motor vehicles and pedestrians, and non-motor vehicles and pedestrians.
In a traffic accident, the motor vehicle and the motor vehicle, non-motor vehicle, and pedestrian have the same rights and obligations as the driver of the vehicle, and both parties to the accident must abide by traffic laws and regulations.
Animals or pets don't have human minds and don't understand traffic laws. Keepers and managers do not control their animals, allowing animals to run around on the road, and once a motor vehicle hits an animal or dies, the driver of the vehicle cannot be held responsible. This is because the principle applicable to dealing with traffic accidents is fault compensation, not no-fault compensation. Although the compulsory motor vehicle insurance can bear the no-fault compensation liability for the victim, whether the principle of no-fault compensation can be applied to the death of a pet or animal after being hit by a vehicle is not stipulated by law, and the traffic police cannot arbitrarily demand compensation from the compulsory traffic insurance. In this article, the traffic police mobilize the driver to admit full responsibility, and intend to issue a traffic accident liability determination letter, and the insurance company will compensate through the compulsory traffic insurance of the insured vehicle, which is obviously an illegal operation.
Since the dog that was hit by the vehicle did not have a dog license, the illegal advice of the traffic police was not successful. Therefore, if the dog owner claims the liability of the driver through a lawsuit and asks the insurance company to settle the claim within the scope of the compulsory traffic insurance, the court cannot determine the liability of both parties to the lawsuit and cannot adjudicate. The end result should be to dismiss the dog owner's lawsuit.
In the case of hitting and killing an animal by a car, in principle, it should be resolved through negotiation with the owner of the animal, and if the negotiation fails, the police should be called in time to explain the accident to the traffic police. If the traffic police are unable to determine who is responsible for the dead or injured animal and the driver, they can issue a certificate for the dog owner that the dog was killed by the vehicle that caused the accident. If the vehicle involved in the accident is damaged, the traffic police can also issue a certificate of damage caused by a collision with a dog, and the insurer of the vehicle can apply for compensation for the damaged vehicle by the insurance company based on this certificate. As for whether the insurance company agrees to settle the claim against the dog owner, it depends on the insurance company's judgment on the right and wrong of the accident and the liability.
The Measures for the Handling of Road Traffic Accidents do not stipulate that a vehicle hitting an animal is a traffic accident, but there is a provision that animals are not allowed to wander on highways and national highways. In the event of such a case, the traffic police department generally does not file a case, and can only mediate between the two parties. Because all roads are regulated by traffic laws, animals should be towed by their owners on the road, and households on both sides of the road should keep their own animals in captivity, and domestic animals should not be allowed to be scattered on the road. From a legal point of view, the animal is only the private property of the keeper, and the keeper is obliged to take good care of his animal. In principle, the motor vehicle shall not be liable for the death or injury of an animal that is not controlled by its owner while driving normally.
Article 2 of the Measures for the Handling of Road Traffic Accidents stipulates: "The term "road traffic accident" in these Measures refers to an accident in which vehicle drivers, pedestrians, passengers and other persons engaged in traffic-related activities on the road negligently cause personal injury or death or property damage due to violations of the Road Traffic Management Regulations of the People's Republic of China and other road traffic management regulations and rules (hereinafter referred to as violations). ”
According to this article, the death of an animal by a vehicle is not a "road traffic accident", but can only be regarded as an accident in which a motor vehicle collides with an animal.
Article 17 of the Measures for the Handling of Road Traffic Accidents stipulates that: "After ascertaining the cause of the traffic accident, the public security organ shall determine the responsibility of the party concerned for the traffic accident based on the causal relationship between the party's violation and the traffic accident, as well as the role of the violation in the traffic accident."
If a party has violated a violation, and there is a causal relationship between the violation and the traffic accident, it shall bear responsibility for the traffic accident. If the party concerned has not violated the rules or has violated the rules, but there is no causal relationship between the violation and the traffic accident, he shall not be liable for the traffic accident. ”
This provision has made it clear that "both parties to a traffic accident are only parties", and whether an animal collides with a vehicle, regardless of whether the animal is injured or killed, cannot be determined in accordance with the law, so the collision between a car and an animal can only be a property damage accident, and the animal's liability cannot be determined by the Measures for the Handling of Road Traffic Accidents. Of course, if the driver violates the rules and causes the death of the animal, the traffic police department shall issue a traffic accident liability determination, and the driver shall bear the liability for the property damage of the animal owner.
According to Article 60 of the Road Traffic Safety Law, "tamed livestock shall be used to drive an animal-powered vehicle; When driving an animal-powered vehicle across the road, the driver should get out of the vehicle and pull the livestock; When the driver leaves the vehicle, he shall keep the animal on a leash. ”
In the case of an accident in which a car collides with an animal on a road, this provision can be referred to to determine whether the driver of the normal driving car is at fault. If an animal is killed by a car on the highway because it is not restrained, and the driver is not guilty of violation and fault, he shall not be liable for tort.
This article is just the author's personal opinion, friends can participate in the discussion.