Financial experts: HUK-Coburg refuses to pay damages in the event of a car accident - the market intervenes

Transparenz: Redaktionell erstellt und geprüft.
Veröffentlicht am

It's annoying when you get into an accident and your insurance company refuses to pay for repairs. That's exactly what happened to a market viewer from Kiel after her car was rammed by another driver at a traffic light. HUK-Coburg refuses to cover the repair costs of over 2,000 euros because it claims previous damage. But is it fair to cite this previous damage as a basis for rejecting repair costs? Markt gets to the bottom of the matter and tries to clarify whether the two damages are actually connected. According to a report from www.ndr.de, As…

Es ist ärgerlich, wenn man in einen Unfall verwickelt wird und die Versicherung sich weigert, die Reparatur zu bezahlen. Genau das ist einer Markt-Zuschauerin aus Kiel passiert, nachdem ihr Auto an einer Ampel von einem anderen Fahrer gerammt wurde. Die HUK-Coburg weigert sich, die Reparaturkosten in Höhe von über 2.000 Euro zu übernehmen, da sie bereits vorhandene Vorschäden geltend macht. Doch ist es fair, diese Vorschäden als Grundlage für die Ablehnung der Reparaturkosten anzuführen? Markt geht der Sache auf den Grund und versucht zu klären, ob die beiden Schäden tatsächlich miteinander in Verbindung stehen. Gemäß einem Bericht von www.ndr.de, Als …
It's annoying when you get into an accident and your insurance company refuses to pay for repairs. That's exactly what happened to a market viewer from Kiel after her car was rammed by another driver at a traffic light. HUK-Coburg refuses to cover the repair costs of over 2,000 euros because it claims previous damage. But is it fair to cite this previous damage as a basis for rejecting repair costs? Markt gets to the bottom of the matter and tries to clarify whether the two damages are actually connected. According to a report from www.ndr.de, As…

Financial experts: HUK-Coburg refuses to pay damages in the event of a car accident - the market intervenes

It's annoying when you get into an accident and your insurance company refuses to pay for repairs. That's exactly what happened to a market viewer from Kiel after her car was rammed by another driver at a traffic light. HUK-Coburg refuses to cover the repair costs of over 2,000 euros because it claims previous damage. But is it fair to cite this previous damage as a basis for rejecting repair costs? Markt gets to the bottom of the matter and tries to clarify whether the two damages are actually connected.

According to a report by www.ndr.de,

As an economic expert, I see the possibility in such cases that insurance companies will try to avoid high costs by citing previous damage as a reason for rejecting claims. This can lead to consumers being disadvantaged in such cases and ultimately being stuck with the costs.

It is important that insurance companies act transparently in such cases and clearly explain the connection between the previous damage and the current damage. In such cases, consumers should not be afraid to take legal action to enforce their right to compensation.

The impact of such practices on the market may result in consumers losing trust in the insurance industry and looking for alternative providers. In the long term, this could lead to competitive pressure in the industry and force insurance companies to establish more transparent and customer-friendly practices.

Overall, it is important that consumers know their rights and do not hesitate to seek legal advice in the event of disputes with insurance companies in order to receive fair compensation.

Read the source article at www.ndr.de

To the article