Couple of days ago, my youngest son, asked me to take his classmates home, so that it decided to lend him the vehicle, here is the case that in route back to our House suffered an accident, where the as the driver of the other vehicle were both injured. To learn immediately report to the insurance company and request the support of a legal adviser.For the time of the signing of the policy, unaware me of the existence of a clauseindicating a stipulation thats excluded from coverage under 25 people or less compared to the 2 yrs of driving, that will utilize the vehicle experienced.Whenever you contact the legal counsel via a query, I request to send him the contract of the policy for your review, so it became aware of this detail, explaining that this is a unilateral decision that certain insurance companies make as regards clauses within the insurance policies required of circulation, that still being accepted by the policyholder of the exact same Sometimes they correspond to an essential and undeniable limitation on the rights of persons who claim their vehicles.This practice leads to a substantial increase of the premium to cancel by the policyholder, even when it is limiting their rights.These drivers are believed most in danger, and its an accident with a 3rd party, of proceeding of the insurance entities is to compensate the injured party, however, subsequently claim the quantity paid to the policyholder.The really interesting, is that during the time of the correct legal services, and make consultation of lawyers in telephone manner, I got the response necessary and sufficient in order to request the review of the clause in the policy and act accordingly, since to keep yourself informed that the Supreme Court in a ruling of 20 November 2014 has limited the exercise of the right of repetition of insurance companies to the assumptions legally provided for in article 10 of the Royal Decree 8/2004, of 29 October, whichapproves the revised text of what the law states on civil liability and insurance in the circulationof motor vehicles, in accordance with this precept only collects the likelihood of Pact on repeat on the assumption that the vehicle being driven by way of a person lacking a drivers license otherwise permitted the inclusion of a provision that excludes coverage to minors aged 25 or drivers with less connection with circulation, which translates unable to repeat from the policyholder the total amount indemnified to the affected 3rd party while such circumstance was expressly collected in this conditions of the policy and could have been expressly accepted by it.But this, said exclusion Pact if it could deploy its effects beyond your scope of the compulsory insurance, allowing in that case repeat the policyholder of the compensation covered damage caused to the insured vehicle.As you will see, be informed punctually, can avoid a variety of disadvantages, including protects us from losses of money, this is important legal counsel


Who Upvoted this Story