Hello, six months ago, I was at a known guest and her dog has bitten my shoes. The shoes were new and had einn value of 140 €. I took care of pictures and receipt so she could report the case of their dogs liability. Now I'm almost half a year behind my money come from running until it escalated. I got to hear statements such as "you can be happy that you get what ever, the insurance would damage not accept" now has the insurance paid € 100 to the mother and then (which I think is funny to me, because me insurance has never written). Now they will not refund the rest to me. It is the opinion of € 100 is enough! Do I like the blank? It goods brand new shoes! And they just argomentiert totally outrageous. She's the keeper of the dog and has breached its duty of supervision, it adheres but why not? I am really angry!! thank you for your answer
The best answer
You're mad and rightly so. You must pay you the damage - whether their dogs indemnity pay her less, is really not your problem. That is what the Civil Code:
If an animal a person is killed or injured, the body or health of a person or a thing damaged, so is he who keeps the animal, obliged to compensate the injured party for any damage arising therefrom.
That the insurance you have not written, in turn, is not very funny, after all you are not a party to the insurance. In cars, the insurance companies take over as a rule, but this need not be so.
Of course they should pay for all the damage that would be the morally right decision. Definitively you can clear only in a conversation. If they do not want to give you, as the insurance company has paid, then you can the rest Although erstreiten, but the cost is not worth more than a lawyer. If you're really angry, then you will not only money, but also have to write off the friendship. Unfortunately.
Insurance act here not by morality but after the contract situation. The Police would theoretically cover the full costs. However, it is also examined whether the damage could have been avoided. Also, the other participants will be looked after fault. For this reason can be reduced at a Hundehafpflichtversicherung without problems the sum insured. (Source: http://www.hundehaftpflichtversicherung-heute.de/ )
Since there could be different backgrounds:
It may be that the insurance company has paid more that Feundin you however want to give only 100,00 € and pocketed the rest.
Or the insurance has a deductible "new for old" made and determined as a value only € 100.00. Shoes are devalued very quickly due to the high wear and fashion change. Even if you shoes still can regard as "new" a deduction insurance after just a few days of wearing or after your purchase. Then you have to see some of the deduction can, because you deserve only the value for the liability law.
Clarify You can use the - as they obviously blocked - ultimately only if you hetzst the friend a lawyer on his neck. But is it worth it, for 40, - Euro? I would according to the described behavior check once the relationship with the lady.
Why the money to the mother (which: on your or her mother - probably to her mother) had been referred is also weird for me. Perhaps part of the mother of the dog or running the Tierhaltervericherung on their behalf. Or she has a ungodly reason the mother indicated for some as victims. But could talk that you were not written as a victim, which would be common.
Yes it is liable, otherwise buy yourself ne cat and let them at her home going, let's see if she also finds funny if what is damaged, her droit with ner indicator has not to decide how much rich €