Original title: Audi sedan was hit and sent to the store for repair. The owner complained that the rental and transportation fees were supported

Legal Network News: Correspondent Ma Chao, Cheng Fei, Gu Jianbing, Mr. Geng, was driving an Audi sedan and stopped on the road due to a traffic accident. He was rear-ended by Hu, causing damage to both cars. During the period when the Audi car was sent to a 4S store for repair, Mr. Geng rented another Camry for transportation, resulting in a rental fee of 18020 yuan. There was a dispute between the two parties regarding the compensation for this rental fee.

On December 10th, the Intermediate People's Court of Nantong City, Jiangsu Province, made a final judgment in upholding the first instance of the motor vehicle traffic accident liability dispute case. As the plaintiff's vehicle damage was caused by two traffic accidents, the infringers of these two traffic accidents should jointly bear the compensation responsibility for trailer fees and rental fees. The court ruled that the insurance company should compensate the plaintiff with 50% of the trailer fees, or 210 yuan, within the limits of compulsory and commercial insurance 50% of the rental fee is 9010 yuan, and the total vehicle maintenance fee is 71420 yuan.

At around 21:25 on January 17, 2014, Hu collided with Mr. Geng's Audi car, which had been parked on the road due to a traffic accident, causing damage to both cars. According to the traffic police department, Hu is fully responsible for the accident. After the incident, Mr. Geng sent the Audi car to a 4S store for repair, paying 62200 yuan for the repair fee and 420 yuan for the trailer fee. During the vehicle repair period, Mr. Geng also rented a Camry sedan from a car rental company as a means of transportation and paid a rent of 18020 yuan.

It was also found that the small bus driven by Hu was insured against compulsory traffic insurance and third-party commercial liability insurance with an insurance company, and the incident occurred within the insurance period.

Afterwards, both parties failed to reach an agreement on compensation for car rental fees. Mr. Geng sued the insurance company and Mr. Hu together in court, claiming a total of over 80000 yuan, including 18020 yuan for car rental fees, maintenance fees, and trailer fees.

In court, the insurance company argued that the rental fee was not a direct loss and was not covered by insurance compensation.

The first instance court held that after the traffic accident involved in the case, the plaintiff was unable to continue using the vehicle due to damage. Therefore, they signed a "Car Rental Contract" to lease the vehicle for use, and the reasonable rental costs incurred should be borne by the insurance company. According to Article 12 of the Tort Liability Law of the People's Republic of China, if two or more individuals commit tortious acts separately and cause the same damage, it is difficult to determine the magnitude of liability, they shall bear equal compensation liability. Due to two traffic accidents causing the damage to the plaintiff's vehicle, the infringers of these two traffic accidents should jointly bear the liability for compensation for both trailer and rental fees. Therefore, the insurance company was ordered to compensate the plaintiff with 50% of the trailer fee, which is 210 yuan, 50% of the rental fee, which is 9010 yuan, and a total of 71420 yuan for vehicle maintenance within the limits of compulsory and commercial insurance.

The insurance company is dissatisfied and appeals to the second instance court. The Nantong Intermediate People's Court upheld the original judgment after trial.

The reasonable cost of alternative transportation should be supported

According to Qian Bolin, the presiding judge of the second instance of the case, Article 15 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Road Traffic Accident Damage Compensation Cases stipulates that if a party requests compensation from the infringer for the following property losses caused by a road traffic accident, the people's court should support:... (4) the reasonable expenses incurred by non operating vehicles due to their inability to continue using, which are usually alternative means of transportation.

In this case, the plaintiff's own vehicle is Audi, which was damaged in an accident and cannot be used anymore. Therefore, the plaintiff leased the Camry as a normal alternative transportation vehicle. Taking into account the vehicle value and the plaintiff's usage, the rental costs incurred by the plaintiff during the repair period should be within a reasonable range. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim that the rental costs should be compensated by the insurance company should be supported, "Qian Bolin said.