Case study · Karlsruhe-Durlach
Parked, and still a third of the liability
Parking lot damage with partial fault: a documented case from our office, told chronologically, with the actual amounts from the real correspondence.
Every figure here comes straight from the original correspondence with the insurer. Supporting documents are included as images.
"But my car was parked"
The most common misconception after a parking lot accident: "My car was parked, so the other side pays a hundred percent." In practice, that's often not true. The opposing liability insurer can still assign a share of fault to a parked vehicle. And once that happens, every single item in the settlement gets reduced by that share: repair costs, diminished value, and even our appraiser's fee.
We'll show you how this kind of partial fault comes about, and what it actually costs, using a real case from our office. Told chronologically, with the amounts from the actual correspondence.
Overview
The case at a glance
| Vehicle | Audi A8 60 TFSI e quattro, first registered 04/2021, 48,232 km, one previous owner |
|---|---|
| Date of accident | 6 November 2025 |
| Accident location | Germersheim · inspection and all handling in Karlsruhe-Durlach |
| Liable insurer | HUK-COBURG Allgemeine Versicherung AG |
| What happened | The other driver reversed out of a parking space and hit the vehicle parked behind them |
| Inspection | 11 November 2025, Ingenieurbüro Frieß, Karlsruhe-Durlach |
| Damage | Front right door dented, needs replacing; blend-paint on front right fender and rear right door |
| Repair costs | €5,464.12 net · €6,502.30 gross |
| Diminished value | €650.00 |
| Replacement value | €54,000.00 |
| Insurer's liability share | 2/3 |
| Settlement | notional, based on the expert report (net) |
| Time to last documented payment | just under 6 months |
Timeline
How it unfolded
From the accident to the final payment, every step with its date.
Nov 6, 2025
The accident
The vehicle is parked. The other driver reverses into it while pulling out of her space. Damage runs along the entire passenger side.
Nov 11, 2025
Inspection in Karlsruhe-Durlach
The owner brings the car to our office five days after the accident. We explain that with parking lot accidents, the question of shared liability is almost always on the table.
Nov 12, 2025
The report
Liability damage report, 19 pages, 14 photos. Calculated using the hourly labor rates of a regional brand-authorized workshop, justified by the complete service history at the Audi dealer.
Spring 2026
The first settlement
The insurer settles based on a 2/3 quota and additionally applies a lower base amount than the one stated in the report.
Apr 13, 2026
Our response
The client forwards the letter to us. That same day, our response goes out to the insurer, with the Audi center's service records attached.
May 4, 2026
The additional payment
Three weeks later, the insurer corrects the settlement and pays an additional 500.58 €. No lawyer, no lawsuit needed.
November 11, 2025
Documenting damage on black metallic paint
Mythos Black Metallic doesn't forgive sloppy documentation. What looks like a minor irregularity to the naked eye can turn out to be a dent spanning half the door's width. And what looks like a deep scratch is sometimes just a reflection.
That's why we use a black-and-white reflection stripe board. The stripes reflect on the paint surface, and any deformation visibly and measurably distorts the pattern.
12 November 2025
What the report stated
One detail from the report turned out to be decisive five months later: we calculated the repair costs using the hourly rates of a regional authorized specialist workshop, not the lower rates of an independent garage.
That's not wishful thinking - it follows directly from the condition of the vehicle. The A8 was four years old, had one previous owner, and a complete service history with the Audi dealer, starting with the handover inspection on 14.04.2021 at 9 km mileage.
The claim was settled on a fictitious basis - meaning based on the report, without an actual repair invoice. That's why the insurer only paid the net amounts (§ 249 (2) sentence 2 BGB). And that's exactly why the dispute centered on the hourly rates in the first place: if you have the repair actually carried out and submit the workshop invoice, you get reimbursed the amount you actually paid. If you settle on a fictitious basis, you get the rates calculated in the report - and that's where the rates become open to dispute.
- Repair costs: €5,464.12 net
- Diminished value: €650.00
- Loss-of-use compensation: €175.00 per calendar day
- Repair duration: 3 working days
- Road safety: not affected by the damage
- Residual value: not determined, as the repair costs are far below the vehicle's value
Rule of thumb: full-service history means real money
A complete service history with the authorized dealer is what entitles you to the brand workshop's hourly rates. The difference can quickly run into four figures. Keep your service records - digital ones too.
Case law
What this is based on
The right to the brand workshop's hourly rates isn't a matter of interpretation. It's been settled by the highest courts for years.
| BGH, 29.04.2003 · VI ZR 398/02 | For notional settlements, the hourly labour rates of a brand-affiliated specialist workshop, as determined regionally by an appraiser, may be used as the basis. |
|---|---|
| BGH, 20.10.2009 · VI ZR 53/09 | If the insurer wants to refer the claimant to an independent workshop, it must prove that the workshop is genuinely equivalent. Special rates negotiated with its partner workshops don't count. |
| BGH, 07.02.2017 · VI ZR 182/16 | For vehicles over three years old, such a referral is unreasonable if the claimant can show that the vehicle was always serviced and repaired at the brand workshop. That is exactly the evidence we submitted on 13.04.2026. |
The A8 was four and a half years old at the time of the accident, so the three-year rule didn't apply. The service booklet evidence was the deciding factor. We are appraisers, not lawyers: this overview does not replace individual legal advice.
The proof
Unbroken service history with the authorised dealer
Excerpts from the vehicle's digital service history, from the handover inspection to the last service before the accident, always at the Audi Center. This exact record was the attachment to our statement. Order numbers redacted.
Spring 2026
The first settlement: two cuts at once
The insurer settled the claim at a rate of 2/3. What this letter doesn't say, and only becomes clear once you check the numbers: even within that 2/3, they started from a lower base amount than our report.
Working backwards from the payment of 3,142.17 €, only 4,713.26 € net in repair costs had been recognised, compared to the 5,464.12 € established in the report. Difference: 750.86 €. Exactly the gap between independent and brand-specific hourly rates.
Rule of thumb: a liability rate is rarely the only cut
Always check whether the insurer is even calculating from the correct base amount. You only spot this difference by placing the report and the settlement side by side.
13 April 2026
Our statement
Our client did what we'd discussed at the inspection: he forwarded the letter to us instead of accepting it. Our statement went to the insurer that very same day, with the Audi Center's service record attached.
"In the matter at hand, there is an unbroken service history with an authorised Audi dealer (see attachment). We therefore ask that the settlement letter be corrected accordingly and that payment be made using the hourly labour rates of the local Audi Center, as applied in the report."
No argument, no threats, just proof and the resulting legal consequence. In this kind of situation, that's usually all it takes.
13 April 2026
The Quota Also Applies to the Assessor's Fee
The insurer settled our fee that same day.
| Surveyor's fee | 1,104.92 € |
|---|---|
| 2/3 of that, per the liability rate | 736.61 € |
| remaining third | 368.31 € |
This is where shared liability becomes truly unpleasant for those affected: the rate also applies to the surveyor's fee. Our client would have had to cover the remaining third out of his own pocket, for damage he didn't cause, to a vehicle that was parked.
Wording
What the Letter Says
The line items of the settlement letter dated 13.04.2026, exactly as stated there.
| Subject | Motor vehicle liability claim of 06.11.2025 |
|---|---|
| Expert's fee | €1,104.92 |
| Subtotal | €1,104.92 |
| of which 2/3 according to the quota | €736.61 |
| Compensation amount | €3,878.78 |
At first glance, the compensation amount seems impossible to explain, because the statement only lists the fee. It's actually the sum of two payments made that day: €3,142.17 to our client and €736.61 to our office. The repair cost share is included, without appearing in the statement. If you only have this one page in front of you, the figure simply doesn't add up. Only the corrected letter dated 04.05.2026 reveals the full picture.
This Third We Waived
Without our client even asking for it. That's our approach in quota cases: if we warn someone about a quota and they hire us anyway, that decision shouldn't cost them money.
Actual out-of-pocket cost for our client: €0.
May 4, 2026
The additional payment
Three weeks after our statement, the insurer corrected the settlement.
| Repair costs (now with the calculated hourly rates) | €5,464.12 |
|---|---|
| Expert report fee | €1,104.92 |
| Subtotal | €6,569.04 |
| of which 2/3 according to the liability share | €4,379.36 |
| additionally paid out on 04.05.2026 | €500.58 |
That's exactly two-thirds of the previously missing €750.86. So the statement made a difference. No lawyer, no lawsuit — just one letter and one attachment. The letter includes the usual reservation: the repair costs would be settled "based on the expert's cost estimate or damage assessment forecast," without this constituting an acknowledgment of liability.
What this means for our client
| Additional payment after our statement on the hourly labor rates | €500.58 |
|---|---|
| Waived personal contribution to the assessor's fee | €368.31 |
On top of that came the €650.00 diminished value and the flat-rate expense allowance, both missing from the first settlement, which we had to request again over several rounds. Both amounts are money our client would never have received if he had quietly accepted the first settlement — and it cost him no extra effort beyond forwarding an email.
The client on this case
Publicly viewable on Google
“Luckily I'd already hired Ingenieurbüro Frieß in Karlsruhe for the report, because that's when things really got going. I just forwarded every letter from HUK to the team at Frieß and they took care of it. Three rounds, following up every time, and in the end they got me over 1,000 euros more. On my own, I'd have just swallowed that first settlement.”
Simon A., Google review of this case
For context
What we can verify ourselves, and what we can't
The settlement letters we have on file show a back payment of 500.58 € and a waived fee of 368.31 €. The total figure mentioned by our client also includes the diminished value and the flat-rate expenses, which we claimed in later rounds. We don't have those letters on file for this write-up. So that figure is presented here as our client's statement, not our own.
The 4,713.26 € recognised in the first settlement is also calculated backwards from the payment received, not read directly from the letter.
Conclusion
What you can take away from this case
If you've had a parking-lot accident with shared fault in or around Karlsruhe, there are two things you should do: check the insurer's settlement line by line against the report, and forward every letter to your assessor instead of just accepting it. In this case, that approach led to a back payment of 500.58 € and a waived share of 368.31 €, without a lawyer and without going to court.
Five takeaways that apply beyond this one case:
- A parked car doesn't protect you from a liability share. Expect the other party's insurer to check for shared fault.
- The liability share is rarely the only deduction. Put the report and the settlement side by side. In this case, there were 750.86 € in between.
- A full service history is a legal argument. Uninterrupted servicing at the dealer supports your claim to the branded workshop's hourly rates.
- Forward every letter from the insurer to your assessor. This follow-up work is included in our report fee at *{name}* and costs you nothing extra.
- Ask beforehand how your assessor handles your share of the cost. With a liability split, the insurer only pays the assessor's fee proportionally.
The author
Who handled this case
Sascha Frieß
Owner · Expert appraiser
Business engineer (M.Sc., KIT) and managing partner. Before joining the office, he spent eight years in automotive consulting at Porsche Consulting, focusing on aftersales. Today, he handles damage and value assessments as well as claims settlement with insurers.
- M.Sc. in Industrial Engineering (KIT)
- Certified vehicle appraiser
- Damage and value assessment
- Claims settlement with insurers
The inspection, the calculation, and the statement dated 13.04.2026 in this case are his work.
More about Sascha FrießFrequently asked questions
Partial fault, quota, and expert costs
Can I be held partly at fault even though my car was parked?
- Vehicle sticks out over the parking line or stands entirely outside the marked bay
- parked in the driving lane, on a bend, or in a spot with poor visibility
- parked in a no-stopping or no-parking zone
- parked on the pavement or in a way that blocks passage
- poor visibility, for example parked in the dark without lights
The exact share depends on the individual case: courts usually set the basic operational risk at 20 to 25 percent, and higher still for a serious parking violation. The more severe the violation and the less visible the vehicle was, the higher the share. In our case, the insurer applied 1/3, and we have no explanation on file for that figure.
Who pays the vehicle expert after an accident that wasn't your fault?
With us, the rule is: up to a co-liability of 50 percent, we waive the remaining share you'd otherwise have to pay yourself. In this case, that was 368.31 euros our client didn't even have to ask about.
What can I do if the insurer cuts the hourly labor rates?
- Vehicle up to three years old: as a rule, you don't have to accept being referred to an independent workshop.
- Vehicle older than three years: you can demand dealer rates if you can prove that maintenance and repairs were always carried out at an authorized dealer workshop (BGH, 07.02.2017 – VI ZR 182/16).
- If the insurer wants to refer you to an independent workshop, it must prove that workshop is equally qualified (BGH, 20.10.2009 – VI ZR 53/09).
In practice, proof of servicing attached to a statement is often enough. In this case, that's exactly what happened, and the insurer paid the difference three weeks later.
How do I know if I've been underpaid?
What is merkantile Wertminderung (diminished value)?
Make sure this item actually appears in the settlement. In the documented case, it was missing from the first settlement and had to be claimed afterward.
Do I need a lawyer?
- The fault quota is disputed or applied without any explanation.
- The other party disputes what happened, or it's one word against the other.
- It involves personal injury or a total loss with a high amount at stake.
If the other party is liable, their insurer also covers the lawyer's fees. We're vehicle experts, not lawyers: we tell you what's wrong technically and in the figures, while legal representation is handled by a lawyer.
Have questions about your case?
We'll take a look at it.
Inspection, report, and all correspondence with the insurer - everything from one source in Karlsruhe and the surrounding area.
Mon–Sat 08:00–20:00