Driver: "Driver" - a person controlling any vehicle, a drivers drivers, leading along the road of coagulous, hang animals or herd. Educational driving is equal to the driver ... (Resolution of the Government of the Russian Federation of October 23, 1993 N 1090 "On the Rules road") The driver is a person controlling the vehicle. When teaching the management of the vehicle, the driver is considered a training person (Article 1 of the OSAGO Law) driver vehicle - a person controlling the vehicle (including training management vehicle). The driver can control the vehicle for personal purposes or as an employee or an individual entrepreneur ...
What is the difference between the owner and the owner of the vehicle?
When renting a vehicle without management services and maintenance The owner (and responsible for the harm) will be considered directator directly. However, if the car rental agreement provides for the provision of services for managing and maintenance (i.e. is a chartering contract), the vehicle is considered to be the remaining person - the landlord. If the car managed the worker, and the owner of the car is his employer, then the employer will be responsible, regardless of whether the harm caused, or the driver performed the "left flight", it is important that the employer himself entrusted this machine to the employee.
Another thing, if the driver took a car to ride without permission, but in this case this fact will have to prove this fact.
Owner in words
Info
The answer is the owner and the owner - what's the difference. Owner. According to simple, this is the person, whose name is decorated with a specific car, that is, whose data is reflected in the passport of the vehicle (TCP) and the certificate of registration. What is the legal owner of the vehicle? This issue becomes relevant for people who came to an accident, because it is responsible for the damage caused. In accordance with Article 1079 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the obligation of compensation for harm caused by the source of increased danger (that is, when using a vehicle) assigned to a citizen who owns a source of increased danger on the right of ownership, the right of economic management or the right of operational management or on other legal grounds ( On the right lease, by proxy for the right to control the vehicle, etc.).
Vehicle owner and owner
However, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 209 of the Civil Code, the owner is entitled to transfer all these powers (one, two or all together) to another person. The issuance of a power of attorney containing the list of rights provided, confirms their transfer. At the same time, the owner remains the owner, but it is obviously deprived of the opportunity to use this property from the moment of its transfer.
The laws transferred to the owner will now not belong to him, but the new legal owner is the owner by proxy. Of course, it is necessary to distinguish between legitimate and illegal possession. Illegal possession does not give any right-wing, but it leads to considerable load of responsibility.
So, under the owner of the vehicle, we understand its legal owner, at the moment who uses it in its own (indirectly it is confirmed by the 2nd paragraph of paragraph 1 of Article 1079 of the Civil Code). Now we will deal with responsibility.
Sign in
Attention
GK). These include: a) natural natural phenomena (earthquake, floods, fires, typhoon) b) some circumstances of public life (military actions, national strikes, large-scale epidemics) c) announcement of prohibitive acts government agencies. In case of solidarity responsibility of debtors (harm injuries), the lender (victim) is entitled to demand compensation for harm both from all debtors together and from any of them individually, moreover, both fully and in terms of debt (Article.323 of the Civil Code). Subsidiary Responsibility - "Additional" Responsibility that a person carries due to the law in case of deficiency of the property of the Basic Debtor to meet the requirements of the creditor (Article 399 of the Civil Code).
- the owner, a person who is the actual owner, in addition, in addition to the actual possession of the object he has no other right. The owner is the one who besides the right of ownership has the right to use and dispose of the object - that is, in terms of the amount of rights, the owner of the owner is more than the owner.
- The owner is the one who owns this at the moment, there may be no legitimate owner - the one who owns something on legal grounds here from JUR. Point of view: Vosteniev civil law, the actual possession of the thing. V. owner and V. Incoma differ. B. Owner is one of the emphasis (along with the use and order), which are in the content of property rights, it is always protected by law. V. Incomplete may be legal and illegal.
Owner NC and owner in Belarus than difference
However, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 209 of the Civil Code, the owner is entitled to transfer all these powers (one, two or all together) to another person. The issuance of a power of attorney containing the list of rights provided, confirms their transfer. At the same time, the owner remains the owner, but it is obviously deprived of the opportunity to use this property from the moment of its transfer.
The laws transferred to the owner will now not belong to him, but the new legal owner is the owner by proxy. Of course, it is necessary to distinguish between legitimate and illegal possession. Illegal possession does not give any right-wing, but it leads to considerable load of responsibility.
So, under the owner of the vehicle, we understand its legal owner, at the moment who uses it in its own (indirectly it is confirmed by the 2nd paragraph of paragraph 1 of Article 1079 of the Civil Code). Now we will deal with responsibility.
Owner of the vehicle and owner in Belarus than the difference
Important
The basis of legal V. is always any legal base (legal title). This means that V. originated on the basis of the law, contract, an administrative act. With legal V. Persons who are not the owner of this thing, it is transferred to him voluntarily by the owner (for example, under storage contracts, hiring, loans, etc.
d.). Illegal is V. Persons who kidnapped the thing or who assigned to the find. In civil law, illegal V., in turn, is divided into conscientious and unfair. The conscientious owner is the one who did not know and in circumstances could not know about the illegality of his V.; The unfinished owner knew or had to know about the misunderstanding of his V. (knew that she acquires a thing from the face unconditioned on sale). Differentiation of conscientious and unfair V.
However, if the owner was in the same car, it is believed that she did not drop out of his possession, and his owner will suffer responsibility (they shot down a person - the criminal in the driver, the damage to health - on the owner). The owners of the sources of increased danger jointly shall be liable for the damage caused to third parties as a result of the interaction of these sources (collisions of two / several TCs), the damage caused by the interaction of the sources of increased risk of their owners, is reimbursed by the culprit / culprits of the incident, proportionate wine, i.e. on general reasons (Article 1064 of the Civil Code). If the person controls the car (without having his own rights to own it) in the presence of the owner or person who has a power of attorney will be responsible.
With responsibility for violation of traffic rules (administrative) All simply - subjects of offenses are clearly indicated, in the formulations of the corresponding composition of the offense (in the Administrative Code). It can be both the owners or owners of the CU by proxy and the person controlling the car in the presence of the owner / owner by proxy *. In other words, in most cases the driver is responsible, i.e.
Car controlling. * or other special law (rent, freight, the disposal of the appropriate officer, for example, the provision of the car by the employer) in some cases, a person who is not a driver, but being the owner or owner of a car by proxy *, can also be attracted to administrative responsibility (For example, when transmitting a vehicle management, a person who does not have the right to control).
GK). Under the fault, there is no insuming, lack of education, promoting mischief. Educational, educational, medical, and other institutions that have been officially entrusted are also responsible. Minors from 15 to reaching 18 years are responsible for harm independently; Parents are subject to subsidiary responsibility, that is, only within the lack of minors, again, if they do not prove the absence of their guilt. Similar to the responsibility of the same institutions (see above) (Article 1074 of the Civil Code). It must be borne in mind that the guilt of parents will be obvious when their child, even being the owner of the car, used the car (ruled himself or transferred control having driver's license) Without the permission of parents and unattended from their part or other appropriate persons. An insurmountable force - emergency and unpredictable circumstances under these conditions (p.
Quite often, one person acquires a car, and exploits another.
In order not to spend time on re-issuing rights to property, the legislation of the Russian Federation provides the possibility of the owner of the automotive means to entrust the control of the machine to another person.
In this case, it acquires relevance to the question of who can be an insurer on the OSAO, and is it possible to make insurance not to the owner of the car.
First of all, it should be understood who is the insured in the policy of the OSAGO. They are a person who concludes an OSAGA agreement with an insurance organization.
The insured pays money for insurance and makes the necessary adjustments in the future. It has the right to change the period of use, enter new drivers, get a duplicate policy and the like.
The RF Rules have made adjustments, the provision of the law has changed against persons who draw up insurance policies.
The insured and the owner of the vehicle is different persons on the OSAGO. In the insurance form, two separate graphs are given for them, which confirms the right to execute the policy by another person. It can be any driver allowed to control the automotive agent.
In accordance with the legislation, the party to the contract may appear:
- the owner himself;
- his trustee;
- the driver that operates the automotive remedy by proxy;
- close man or just familiar.
Thus, the insured in the policy of the CTP may not be the owner of the car. At the same time, a person does not necessarily have a notarized power of attorney for him.
An insured can be one person, the owner of another, and the third party can manage the insured vehicle.
There are no special guidance in law on individual This should be either an organization. Insure the car has the right to any face.
The insured must simply fulfill his simple duties:
- To submit truthful information, effective documents or their photocopies, they are needed to correctly calculate the insurance premium and the conclusion of the OSAGO Agreement.
- In a timely manner to make the necessary changes in the policy, if necessary during the year.
The presence of the owner for registration of insurance is not a prerequisite. But his name fits into the policy of autocaretries.
The insured must be part of the insurance of CTP as a driver allowed to manage. This is a person who has entered into a compulsory insurance contract and made a payment. It automatically becomes the driver entered into insurance, the insurance coating is distributed on it.
For the owner, when making a machine is not on the owner, it is not necessary to fit into the policy as a driver.
To make insurance without the presence of the owner can any driver who is written by a power of attorney, and it does not have to be certified by a notary.
The owner of the vehicle can issue a disposable, special or general power of attorney for the execution of the policy. The handwritten option is suitable.
In addition, the following documents will be needed:
- Statement about insurance.
- The driver's license of all persons who are allowed to drove by a car on the policy of OSAGO.
- Driver ID and copy of the passport of the car owner.
- Documents on the machine - TCP and registration certificate.
- Preceded by the policy of autocarticles.
- Directly, the power of attorney for the conclusion of the OSAGO Agreement.
You can prevent the above list of documents in copies if the insurance organization allows it.
The cost of insurance depends on several factors:
- driver experience;
- his age;
- coefficient KBM.
When calculating, data will be taken into account only those persons who are allowed to control the automotive agent. The cost of insurance will depend on their quantity. Therefore, you should enter only those drivers who plan to use the machine constantly.
If the policy is not the owner of the car, but another person, then the owner can not enter into insurance. Since the presence of the policy gives the car owner the right to use it.
Registration of the Osago Polis not on the owner of the car for the cost of insurance will not affect completely.
By law, which is valid in 2020, when combining the insured and the owner in one person, there is no changes in the cost of the policy.
It can be noted that additional expenses are coming the owner of the vehicle when prescribed by attorney at the notary.
The presence of the OSAGA policy gives the insured a guarantee that in the case of a traffic accident, the cost of repairing the affected car completely or partially will cover the insurance organization.
If the policy is not drawn up for the host of the vehicle, the drivers have a question that is the beneficiary on the OSAGO, the owner or the policyholder. By law, insurance compensation is relying the owner of the car.
Monetary compensation can be obtained in cash at the cashier's office or by bank transfer, providing the recipient details.
It is the owner of the vehicle is those who will receive payments upon the occurrence of the insured event. Therefore, he should foresee all the nuances of insurance.
The right to receive insurance compensation will be only with him, if only he does not make a power of attorney to another person to receive payments. In this situation, the power of attorney must be certified by a notary.
When does the car owner become the owner of the car? What documents are needed to confirm the right of ownership of movable four-wheeled property? Does this ratio make a registration machine for registration, as well as removal from it to the traffic police.
These, as it turned out, important issues answered the Supreme Court in the review judicial practice. This is essentially specific recommendations for all other vessels, how to make decisions in such situations.
Some insurance companies, as well as some judges, as it turned out, do not know from what moment the ownership of movable property comes, that is, the car. As a result, the first refuse to pay after the accident, and the second support them in error.
So, in April 2014, an accident occurred in Rostov-on-Don. Driver Zaitseva crashed into the Chekhov car. Experts appreciated the damage of 105 thousand rubles. However, the insurance culprit of the accident refused to pay. She referred to the fact that the car allegedly does not belong to Chekhov. According to the passport of the vehicle, as well as a registration certificate, the car is registered with the traffic police after another person. And therefore he is not the owner of the car and claim for payments can not. And this is despite the fact that he has a contract of sale, the act of receiving the car, as well as the CPM Agreement, concluded on the basis of these documents, with another insurance company.
In general, insurers are much to seek excuses, just not to pay on accounts. However, the court of first instance confirmed the validity of their claims. He supported him and the court appeals instance. Like, the car from the registration record was not filmed, to the new, for Czechov, did not put. And therefore, she does not belong to Chekhov, despite the fact that he paid money for her and received her property under the contract of sale and the act of reception.
However, the Supreme Court did not agree with such a decision. In accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 218 Civil Code RF property ownership can be acquired by another person on the basis of the contract of sale, exchange, donation or other transaction on the alienation of this property. As a general rule, enshrined in paragraph 1 of Article 223 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, the moment of the occurrence of ownership of the acquirer of a thing under the contract is the moment of its transfer, unless otherwise provided by law or contract.
Other is real estate. Ownership in this case is subject to state registration. And only after this procedure, having received the appropriate document, the owner becomes a full-awake owner. But K. real Estate relate land, plots of subsoil and everything that is firmly related to the Earth, that is, objects, the movement of which is impossible without disproportionate damage to their appointment, including buildings, structures, facilities of unfinished construction.
By the way, both aircraft and maritime ships are also applied to real matters. They are also subject to state registration.
However, cars, motorcycles and others belong to movable property. State registration of rights to them does not apply. Registration of vehicles is accountable and does not serve as a basis for ownership of them. That is, without registration, the car can not ride on public roads. It is spelled out in the road safety law. Exceptions are made for those who have just acquired a car. For registration for registration, they released 10 days.
The Civil Code of the Russian Federation and other federal laws do not contain norms that limit the authority of the owner by order by the vehicle in cases where this vehicle has not been removed from the registration accounting. There are no legislation and norms that the new acquirer of the vehicle under the contract does not arise the right of ownership if the former owner has not taken it out of registration. Thus, the ownership of the car arises from the moment to transfer to its new owner on the basis of the contract of sale when signing the act of acceptance and transmission.
Ownership of the car arises from the moment to transfer to its new owner
And for whom the car is registered in the traffic police - no one should disturb anyone, except for the previous owner. The courts of all this did not take into account. Therefore, the Supreme Court returned the case to a new consideration of the appellate court, so that the decision was made with new introductory.
I must say that the owner of the car is obliged to register the car in the traffic police within 10 days. Owning a car imposes certain obligations. At least on the payment of the tax on the vehicle. It does not matter whether it is operated or not.
At the same time, the tax inspectorate, as well as the traffic police contract and the act of acceptance and transmission, are considered documents that confirm the transfer of property rights. And for some reason insurers no.
The story is such. The man bought a car, issued a contract and was supposed to put the car for accounting in the traffic police in 10 days. But on the third day I got into an accident.
The man wanted to get money from the insured culprit, but could not. Insurance decided that he was not at all the owner, since another person was specified in the TCP. The purchase and sale agreement seems to mean anything.
The car owner went through the courts. The district and regional stood on the side of the insurance company and did not adopt a contract as confirmation of ownership. And the supreme gave everyone a hat and said that there is no: the contract is confirmed by the right of ownership, with all the consequences.
It should be noted that recently the Supreme Court is just doing that he says:
"Are you squeezed there on the ground?"
Total: if I bought a car, then officially become her owner when I signed a contract and got behind the wheel. If the former owner is specified in the TCP, and the car has not been removed from the traffic police, it does not matter.
Who is listed in the contract, he has the right to do everything that the owner can do. Including to demand compensation for damage from the insurance or culprit of an accident. And although registration in the traffic police is obligatory and without it can not be legal to use the car, it is not a relationship to the right of ownership.
In fact, cars need to be registered in the traffic police. What did the court say?
Indeed, there is such a rule: if the ownership needs to register in government agencies, the buyer will become the owner of such property only after registration. In this case, the contract of sale is not enough.
But ... Keep your hands ... This requirement concerns only real estate, and cars do not concern. Registration in the traffic police is not the registration of property rights, but the registration of the car itself.
The law does not have such rules so that ownership of the car somehow depended on the registration in the traffic police. It is impossible to limit the legal owner in the rights only because he did not remove the car from accounting and not specified in the TCP. And to force someone to be responsible for damage if the car is already sold under the contract, but has not yet been discontinued, too, it is also impossible.
Why do you generally contact the insurance culprit and sue? You can contact your and get compensation.
If a person has just bought a car, he still may not be the policy of Osago. For example, he just drove into an insurance company or did not use the car at all, and they were damaged in the parking lot. For the victim it does not matter: even without its policy, you can get compensation in the insurance culprit of an accident.
Osago is insurance liability. If the culprit insured his responsibility and caused someone's damage, the insurance should pay it.
These explanations about the right of ownership and registration are important only for OSAGO?
These are very important clarifications that can be useful in different situations:
- who requires the damage if the culprit does not have the policy or there is not enough payments, but in the TCP another owner;
- to whom to pay damage, if I sold the car, and the buyer did not remove it from accounting and sued you;
- who should seek reimbursement and in what insurance if the contract of sale was issued, and from the record the car has not yet been removed;
- can they pick up the car to the account of the seller's debt, although you bought it, but I did not have time to take it off;
- whether there is a burden on a car, which has not yet been removed from the metering, but under the contract already belongs to another owner.
On August 2, 2014, L. led a car, in the cabin of which there were four passengers - spouses E. and D. with a young daughter, as well as the owner of the machine F. Without coping with the vehicle management, L. made it tipping over. At the same time, E. was caused by grave harm to health, and her daughter died from injuries. The wife was guilty of this incident considered L., because it was she driving a vehicle at the time of the accident. They appealed to the court with a claim in which they were asked to recover from D. Compensation of moral damage due to the death of a daughter in the amount of 1 million rubles, and in favor of E. - compensation for moral damage caused by damage to health, in the amount of 500 thousand . rub. However, L. against the claim was objected to the car, she managed at the oral request F. without registration of any documents and therefore was sure that the responsibility for caused harm was not on it, but on the owner of the car.
The court fell to the plaintiffs and noted that L., having a driver's license with him, managed the vehicle in the presence of the owner, who entrusted it to the management. That is, led the car on legal grounds. Consequently, she must compensate the victims of moral harm. At the same time, the declared claims court satisfied partially, recovered 1 million rubles. At the expense of compensation for non-pecuniary damage in favor of D. and 400 thousand rubles. - in favor of E. (Oktyabrsky decision district Court G. Ulan-Ude dated July 13, 2016 in case number 2-5160 / 2016).
What documents should be given to the victim to obtain insurance payments due to harm to its health, find out from the material "Compensation of harm to the health of the victim
"
in Home Legal Encyclopedia
internet versions of the guarantor system. Get free access for 3 days!
L. did not agree with this and appealed the decision, noting that he was not the owner of the car, did not rule it on the basis of a power of attorney either on another legitimate basis, therefore is not a proper defendant in the case. Responsibility, in her opinion, should be assigned to F. as the owner of the car. Moreover, she asked to consider that at the time of the accident in the salon F. was in a drunken state, and in the actions of E. It is possible to see a gross negligence - the woman did not fastened the safety belts of his child. Appeal agreed that the management of L. Car at the interpretation of the owner does not give reason to consider it a legitimate owner of an increased danger. As a result, the decision of the lower court was canceled, and in claims D. and E. - denied (appeal definition of the judicial collegium civil Affairs Supreme Court of the Republic of Buryatia dated October 19, 2016 No. 33-5625 / 2016).
Attracted to participation in the case as a third party F. appealed the definition of appeal in Supreme Court Russian FederationAnd he found the approach of colleagues from the lower court is not quite legal (definition of SC on civil cases of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation of August 29, 2017 No. 73-kg17-3).
As a general rule, persons whose activities are associated with increased danger to others (this is including the use of vehicles), obliged to compensate the damage caused by the source of increased danger, if they do not prove that it arose due to the insurmountable force or the injection of the victim (). Such a responsibility is assigned to a person who owns the source of increased danger on the right of ownership, the right of economic management or the right of operational management or on another legal basis (on the right of lease, by proxy for the right to manage the vehicle, due to the disposal of the relevant authority to transfer the source of increased hazard etc.).
The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation stressed that not only the owner of the car, but also the person who uses them on legal grounds is responsible for the damage caused by them on legal grounds - while the list of such grounds is open.
The court also added that if a power of attorney for managing the vehicle was issued regarding the person, it is recognized by his legal owner when the car was transferred to him for temporary use and it uses it at his own discretion. If the duties of the person who was issued by a power of attorney, only managing the machine in the interests of another person, and for this, the remuneration (driver's services) is paid to him, the owner of the source of increased danger, such a person is not considered (paragraph 20 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation from 26 January 2010 No. 1 "").
At the same time, the Armed Forces reminded that the driver was currently not obliged to have a power of attorney for the right to control the car. The corresponding requirement was excluded from the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation of November 12, 2012 No. 1156 "".
In view of this, the court concluded that, driving a vehicle without a written power of attorney, but if driver's license And in the presence of the owner, L. used the car on the legitimate basis. However, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation noted, the lower court did not investigate the question of providing the driver's services to it, and other grounds for the liberation of L. from liability for the damned damage was not established.
In this regard, the court canceled the appeal definition and sent a case to a new consideration.
Thus, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation raised the outcome of this kind of case dependence on what conditions the defendant ruled the car. If the person on a paid basis was provided by driver services, which is confirmed by the relevant documents, then it should not compensate for the victims. If not, there will be no additional grounds for the liberation of the driver from responsibility, the duty to reimburse harm will fall on it.