Sudden drop of chimney crashing on parked car
thunderstorm time is the time of damage, not only knows the insurance industry. The following case caught our attention. We know about the problem of many cases of our customers and would like to describe the facts briefly. Please pull your own conclusions!
A violent summer storm raging over a densely populated hillside with heavy traffic. An older building, built in 1968, dominates with about 20 m height of the surrounding buildings and has no lightning!
The lightning finds its way to the chimney of the house and propose there. Falling components and debris hit a vehicle that was parked outside the house properly, damaging it considerably.
The vehicle owner must turn his full insurance, which takes over the repair and expert fees, of course, minus the deductible. Under the scheme, the car owner demoted and the premium is increased.
you guessed it: The holder of the affected vehicle sued the owner of the damaged house Cars for reimbursement of damages. Reason: Since a lightning rod was missing, was dealing with an inadequate construction of the damaged building. Furthermore, he alleges to have violated applicable building code and on top of the chimney is not affected sufficiently evaluated and maintained to have.
The applicant submits an impairment of the damaged car that, the loss of use, repair, and the deductible. The court is asked in the action, consider whether the homeowner does not meet even a replacement requirements relating to the pre-trial legal fees and increased insurance premium.
The district court dismissed the action, first, the appeal to the Landgericht Frankfurt, however, was successful (LG Frankfurt / Main, Judgement of 24.09.2008, 2-15 S 108/08).
The reasoning of the Judge: A breach of building regulations lies not available, the so-called prima facie evidence speak but that construction defects have contributed to cause damage, because "properly constructed and maintained buildings usually collapse or even lose some." (See, BGH of 04.04.2006, VI ZR 151/06, VersR 2006, 931, and dated 23.03.1993, VI ZR 176/92, VersR 1993, 759; Falandt / Sprau, BGB, 67th edition 2008, § 836 para. 9, Wagner in Munich. Comm to BGB, vol 5, 2004m 4th edition § 836 Rn. 5f)
Only for damage would be caused by unusual natural phenomena, such as hurricanes, extreme winds, one can not necessarily originate from construction defects as the cause, the judges said. (BGB, Judgement of 27.04.1999, VI ZR 174/98, VersR 1999th 1424). However, buildings must impact, likely to occur at any time based on general experience is so stubborn squalls and thunderstorms, can withstand, according to Federal Court.
lie in the present case, but not before such an absolutely rare natural event, the LG Frankfurt. Lightning strikes are events that may have to face a property owner at any time. Therefore, he had also to take appropriate measures so such as the elimination of construction defects or the installation of a lightning rod to ensure the stability of his building against external events. The judges were of the opinion that such precautionary measures are easily applicable and for property owners quite economically reasonable.
The homeowner is liable for defective construction in full for the damage to the car.
0 comments:
Post a Comment