The story began when Shlomo Hazan wrote down the number of his immobilizer’s secret code on the driver’s door in his car (along with a number of other important phone numbers). One dark night, the car was stolen. When the insurance company (Bituach Yashir) heard that the “kod sodi” had been written openly on the car door, they promptly refuted the claim. In their opinion, it was as if Hazan had left the car open.
Judge David Mintz started by calling Hazan to task for negligently writing down the secret code and thereby undermining the whole idea of the immobilizer. However, to make the jump from Hazan’s negligence to saying that it was like having no immobilizer at all was going too far. The Insurance Law, (1979) states that damage caused by the negligence of the insured should have no bearing on the claim. It is for this very reason that we buy insurance. The only exception is when someone causes damage intentionally or by gross unacceptable negligence. The judge posed three questions:
1. Was Hazan’s negligence way beyond the normal range of human negligence?
2. Was the insured aware that his action would inevitably cause the damage or theft?
3. Did the insurer prove a definite link between the insured’s action and the theft?
The judge summed up: In Hazan’s case, he left the number among other phone numbers. In other words, there was no gross negligence. Regarding the second question too, Hazan had not intended the theft to take place. Regarding the third question, Bituach Yashir themselves concurred that cars are often stolen despite the secret code. In other words, not having the code is no definite obstruction to a “dedicated” thief.
The final outcome
There was no way to prove a direct link between Hazan’s negligence, and the theft. Bituach Yashir was ordered to pay up!
Important (but often misunderstood) information
Have you ever received an insurance claims check where an amount seems to be deducted from the payment, with the mysterious words “Kinun” printed next to deduction. Translated, this means “re-instatement value”.
An example: Let’s say you pay NIS 3,000 annual premium to insure your car that is worth NIS 80,000. You have an accident, which costs NIS 10,000. The cost of the repair is covered by the insurance but now you have “used up” NIS 10,000 of the cover and therefore need to “top up” the policy. The amount that you actually pay is dependent on a) the cost of the damage and, b) how much longer the policy has to run. In other words, the two extremes are having an accident on the first or last day of the policy. On the first day you would pay maximum “kinun” because you have to ‘top up’ the policy for a full year and on the last day there, there is no “kinun” at all. When the new insurance year begins, everything starts afresh.
When do you not have to pay the Kinun?
- When there is a total loss – in this case you use your entire premium to pay the total cover or, when the accident happens on the last day of the policy.
- Bituach Hova – In claims of personal injury there is no re-instatement value.
- Any case where the client decides not to replace or repair the damage. For example, if you decide not to repair your old Subaru, you will be paid out minus the ma’am but without the reinstatement clause kicking in.
Insurance policies you and your family should have
1) Basic Supplementary health insurance (Overseas operations, Transplants, Medications not in the Sal Briut).
Cost (for couple + 3 or more kids):
NIS 90 per month only.
2) Basic Life Insurance
|Age||Coverage||Male Premium per month in NIS||Female Premium per month in NIS|
|25||1M / 3M||79.30 / 213.50||64.50 / 172.80|
|30||1M / 3M||74.40 / 186.20||65.20 / 170.20|
|35||1M / 3M||83.60 / 207||73.30 / 171.50|
|40||1M / 3M||114.80 / 266.20||92.70 / 194.50|
Call us for details: 02-6232546 –
Egert and Cohen Insurance
We’re here when you need us!!