– How insurance agents and brokers are liable for incorrect fact finding and other errors -. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH, judgment of 12 March 2014, Case No. IV ZR 306/13) dismissed the claim of a policyholder against his insurer for damages due to insufficient information. The insured person or his insurance broker had […]
– When substitution of investments and insurance leads straight to liability – By judgment of 24.07.2015, the OLG Cologne (Case No. 20 U 44/15) ruled that termination and sale of life insurance policies is typically associated with significant disadvantages. Since every insurance broker knows this, he has to point out the disadvantages. If the […]
– Why insurance customers should expect qualified advice – The Saarland Higher Regional Court (ruling of 27.01.2011, ref. 5 U 337/09) ruled that insurance brokers who cannot provide any or only incomplete documentation of their advice bear the full burden of proof for correct advice. The advice and reasons should therefore be noted because […]
If flood victims do not have natural hazards insurance, they may be able to hold their insurance agent liable. Brokers as well as agents have to find coverage risks, advise accordingly and document this completely. A lack of documentation can put intermediaries in dire straits, because it reverses the burden of proof. This is what […]
The Higher Regional Court (OLG Hamm, decision of 5 December 2018, file no. 20 U 146/18) confirmed the dismissal of the complaint regarding the (alleged) miscounseling by an insurance broker when changing the cover of a private health insurance. The new private health insurer had later challenged the contract because of incorrect answers to the […]
– Why a broker is allowed to give advice on changing tariffs for a contingency fee – The Federal Court of Justice decided (BGH, ruling of 28.06.2018, file no. I ZR 77/17) that an insurance brokerage contract does not require that the client is to be looked after on a permanent basis according to […]
In its ruling of 28 February 2018, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH, Ref. XII ZR 94/17) ruled that “a spouse may terminate the fully comprehensive insurance policy for the family vehicle running on his or her partner even without the latter’s power of attorney”, as the press release did not quite put it: […]
In its ruling of 3 August 2017 (Ref. V R 19/16), the Federal Court of Finance (BFH) decided that the establishment of a structured sales organisation is not exempt from VAT. In principle, this not only applies to structured sales organisations and other distribution companies and pools, but also to insurance intermediaries (agents), insurance brokers […]
The Social Court of Dresden (judgement of 09.03.2017, file no. S 39 VE 25/14) decided that if private provision by (accident) pension insurance coincides with pension entitlement under the Victims’ Compensation Act (due to a criminal offence suffered), partial crediting takes place. The victim’s pension of € 708 was reduced by about € 580 (part […]
In the view of VDVM, a current ruling by the BGH will have far-reaching consequences for insurance brokers. Even though it will still be some time before the reasons for the judgement are given, it is becoming apparent that the Federal Court of Justice considers the settlement of claims by insurance brokers to be a […]
