Frequently asked questions – 57 straight answers

Compulsory motor third-party liability insurance (MTPL) covers damage caused to others by your vehicle – the law requires it for every vehicle in traffic, and it protects the injured party while shielding the at-fault driver from the financial burden of compensation. Details: what MTPL is and why it's compulsory.

MTPL covers damage you cause to others and is compulsory; casco (comprehensive cover for your own car) covers damage to your own vehicle (collision, theft, acts of nature) and is voluntary. In a single accident, both often come into play. The full picture: MTPL vs. casco, side by side.

The registered keeper – whoever is listed as registered keeper on the vehicle registration certificate; if there's no such entry, the owner. With leasing, this is typically the lessee. The details of who's who: registered keeper or owner.

Damage to your own car, and injuries you suffer in an accident that was your own fault, aren't covered. Deliberately caused damage is typically paid out to the injured party by the insurer, which can then reclaim the amount from the at-fault driver – just as it can in the case of a serious breach of the rules (e.g. drink-driving).

As long as the vehicle is in traffic, yes – "I'm not using it" doesn't exempt you on its own. The proper way to save money is temporary deregistration and suspension of cover: when and how.

You'll owe an uncovered-period fee for the uncovered days, the authority filters uninsured vehicles out of the register, and if there's a claim, any payout from the Compensation Account (managed by MABISZ, the Association of Hungarian Insurers) can be reclaimed from you. An honest look at the stakes: what happens if you have no MTPL.

Yes: MTPL is compulsory for every vehicle in traffic regardless of the type of drivetrain, electric and hybrid cars included. With some insurers, a fully electric drivetrain can also mean a premium discount, though this varies by insurer and by quote. I show the exact terms in the comparison: electric cars and MTPL.

Yes – a trailer, including a caravan, counts as a separate vehicle, so it needs its own MTPL, independent of the towing car's policy. For light, unbraked trailers, some insurers offer a cheaper, lighter-weight arrangement. It's worth comparing the exact rules and premium bands by insurer: trailers.

MTPL (compulsory motor third-party liability insurance) covers compensation claims brought against the insured persons – the keeper and the driver – so it does not pay for the injuries of a driver who caused the accident through their own fault: they are the person who caused the damage, not the injured party; their own injuries are a matter for accident insurance or an add-on designed for this purpose, and if the other party was also at fault, the other vehicle’s MTPL pays the share attributable to that party. The people travelling in the at-fault car – family members, friends, colleagues – are, however, injured parties: their injuries are paid for by the at-fault vehicle’s MTPL, even if the accident was caused by their own relative. This also applies to the keeper travelling as a passenger, because the Act on compulsory motor third-party liability insurance excludes from the insured persons’ claims against each other only property damage and loss of profit, not personal injury. People in the other vehicle, pedestrians and cyclists are likewise compensated from the at-fault party’s MTPL, and where liability is shared, not-at-fault passengers can typically pursue their claim with the insurer of any of the parties at fault. It is advisable to report a personal injury claim, with medical documentation, on the claims line of the at-fault party’s insurer; the details are described in the article on personal injury claims.

Within Hungary you do not need to carry either the policy or a certificate: under the Act on compulsory motor third-party liability insurance (MTPL), the authority entitled to carry out checks verifies electronically whether cover exists, by querying the central policy register directly, so the police officer can see from the registration number whether there is a policy in force. Since 1 January 2023, when you are stopped for a check within Hungary, you are also not required to carry a driving licence issued by the Hungarian authorities or the vehicle registration certificate – the police check these in the register as well, but you do have to prove your identity, and abroad the documents are still required – and showing an insurance document is not a requirement. It is nevertheless worth keeping the insurer’s certificate or the policy to hand – on your phone, for example – because with a newly concluded policy, if the register has not yet been updated or there is a data error, it can help clear up a misunderstanding on the spot, and after a collision you can use it to give the other party your insurer’s name and the policy number. Abroad, in EEA countries and in the other countries that have joined the registration plate agreement (for example Switzerland and Serbia – the exact list is available on the website of MABISZ, the Hungarian insurers’ association), the Hungarian registration plate and the vehicle registration certificate are sufficient, but in the other countries of the green card system you have to show a green card, which you can typically request from your insurer free of charge. You can also check for yourself, using the registration number, whether the register actually shows your policy as in force – how to do this is described in the article on checking by registration number.

Under the rules in force, there are 15 classes (M04–M01, A00, B01–B10): a claim-free year typically moves you one step up, a paid-out at-fault claim typically moves you two steps back. The full logic: bonus-malus, explained.

No: your class lives in the central claims history register, and your new insurer picks it up from there. The real risk is poor timing (an uncovered gap) – which is why there's a separate article on protecting your bonus-malus class when you switch.

No – only a claim that your insurer paid out against your own policy counts. As a no-fault injured party, your bonus stays unchanged. Details: the effect of an at-fault claim.

Yes, if the old policy ended because your insurable interest ceased (typically through a sale), and the category is the same – but not from alongside a live policy, onto a second car. The conditions: transferring your class and two cars, two policies.

No – the class is tied to the person of the registered keeper: a child doesn't step into a parent's class, and a class can't be gifted. The way to make sensible use of this within a family is choosing the registered keeper deliberately: changing the registered keeper within the family.

In one way: if you repay the full amount the insurer paid out within the deadline set by the rules in force – typically within 45 days. For smaller claims this is often worth it; how to work out whether it pays off: the article on at-fault claims.

Yes, some insurers offer an optional bonus-protection rider that can soften the premium impact of one (typically the first) paid-out claim – the class itself is determined by law and the claims-history register, and the rider does not override it. The rider's extra cost and the scope of protection – how many times, up to what claim size – vary significantly by insurer. If you drive a lot and worry about being moved back a class, it's worth looking at this line separately in the comparison: the bonus-protection rider.

In some cases, yes: some insurers, with the right proof and under the rules in force and their own assessment practice, take foreign claims history into account for your class. This isn't automatic and isn't handled the same way by every insurer. If you're moving back to Hungary, it's worth asking about this specifically when requesting quotes – if you let me know, I can help with this at the quote stage: claims history from abroad.

Under Section 4 (4) of the NGM decree on the bonus-malus system (a decree of the Ministry for National Economy), the insurer takes the classification earned under a terminated contract into account when classifying the new contract only within two years of that contract's termination, and only for a vehicle in the same vehicle category – if more than two years pass between the termination and the new contract, the classification is lost and the new contract starts from class A00. The two-year window does not mean that the car may stand uninsured in the meantime: as long as the vehicle is in circulation, it must have MTPL (compulsory motor third-party liability insurance) cover (an uninsured-period fee, fedezetlenségi díj, is payable for the days without cover), and under the decree the classification of a contract terminated for non-payment of the premium cannot be carried over to a contract taken out for another vehicle – a gap arises lawfully when you sell the car (cessation of insurable interest) or have it temporarily withdrawn from circulation, in which case the MTPL cover is suspended for at most one year under Section 26 of the MTPL Act (Gfbt.), and the contract terminates only when that period expires, so the two years also run only from then. So in the typical situation – you sold the car, lived without a car for a while or worked abroad, and within two years you take out MTPL again for a vehicle of the same category – the classification is retained, and the new insurer can typically see it in the central claims-history register without a certificate; claim-free years earned with a foreign insurer in the meantime, however, are credited on the basis of a foreign certificate and according to the insurer's practice – this is covered in the article “Claims history from abroad: can you get it recognised in Hungary?”. How the transfer works and the case of two cars are described in the articles “Changing cars: how to take your bonus class with you” and “Two cars, two contracts: how does the bonus work out?”.

As a general rule, at your renewal date: under the rules in force, your cancellation must ARRIVE at the insurer at least 30 days before your renewal date – so time your postal or electronic submission with a buffer to allow for this. Finding your renewal date: where to find your date.

Three reliable places: your policy document, your renewal notification letter, and your insurer's customer service or online account – as your broker, I can also check and tell you. For most newer policies, the renewal date follows the date the policy was taken out, not the end of the calendar year.

Only if your policy has a calendar-year renewal date – today that's typically older policies and fleet policies. Every other policy has its own "campaign" at its own renewal date. Details: who the year-end period affects.

Switching isn't the goal – a fresh full picture is: it's worth shopping around at every renewal date, but only switching if the picture is better on both premium AND cover. The honest considerations: when to switch and when not to.

First the new policy – starting from your renewal date –, then the written cancellation before the deadline, and finally the check. This way, an uncovered gap can be avoided. The full process: switching, step by step and the checklist.

In that case the policy typically stays in place until the next renewal date – that's not a disaster: with a schedule timed for the next renewal date and put in your calendar in advance, the opportunity comes back around. A mid-term window can be opened by a change in your life situation (e.g. a sale, a change of registered keeper), under the rules in force.

On sale, the old policy ends under the rules in force because the insurable interest ceases – the seller typically has to report this to the insurer, with the policy details and the sale contract. The new owner needs to take out their own MTPL before putting the vehicle into use, since there can't be an uncovered day. The exact steps and deadlines are summed up in the buying/selling checklist.

Yes, but only in the way laid down by law: under the Act on compulsory motor third-party liability insurance (Gfbt.), the insurer, too, may cancel the contract with effect from the last day of the insurance period (the renewal date), in writing, at least 30 days before the renewal date, without giving reasons – just as you can; under the Gfbt., cancellation is effective if it reaches the other party in time, so the 30 days refer to receipt. During the year the insurer cannot cancel: at that point the contract can end only by mutual agreement of the parties, by cessation of interest (withdrawal of the vehicle from traffic or a change in the person of the keeper, for example a sale) or by non-payment of the premium – the latter is not a cancellation; it occurs by operation of law on the sixtieth day after the due date, once the grace period has expired without payment. Cancellation by the insurer at the renewal date is rare in practice, but it does happen; its consequence is that the vehicle would be uninsured from the renewal date, so a new MTPL policy has to be taken out from the renewal date – in practice with another insurer – and the bonus-malus class can be carried over from the claims-history register – the cancellation does not worsen your class. Termination for non-payment is an important difference: there the Gfbt. does not provide for reinstatement but requires a new contract – for the remainder of the insurance period in question, a new contract can be concluded only with the insurer with which the old one terminated, the premium for the remaining period must be paid when the contract is concluded, and a no-cover fee is payable for the days without cover. If you receive a cancellation from your insurer at the renewal date, treat it as you would your own switch: cover under the new contract should start on the renewal date so that there is not a single day without cover, and compare the dates in the insurer's notice with your policy.

A vehicle can have only one MTPL (compulsory motor third-party liability insurance) contract for any given period: under Section 10 (1) of the MTPL Act (Gfbt.), any further insurance contract concluded for the same insurance period or part of it is invalid, which means that the contract that came into existence earlier remains valid, and the later one overlapping it does not. In a switch gone wrong, in practice this means that if the cancellation of the old contract did not reach the insurer by the deadline (or was not formally in order), the old contract continues into the new period as well, and the new contract concluded with another insurer in the meantime is the invalid one; and if two online contracts were concluded for the same start date, the one concluded later is the redundant one – insurers typically detect this themselves on the basis of the central policy register. What to do: notify both insurers in writing (giving the policy numbers and start dates), ask for the invalid contract to be cancelled and for the premium paid on it to be refunded – the refund procedure and timing differ from insurer to insurer – and check that the details, the classification and the premium payments on the valid contract are in order, because the vehicle's cover rests on that contract throughout, and if a claim occurs during the uncertain days, it is settled by the insurer of that contract. This is not the same as “parallel operation”: that means the same keeper maintains two separate contracts for two vehicles at the same time – in that case, under Section 4 (5) of the bonus-malus decree, the second vehicle's contract is placed in class A00, and only some insurers' tariffs treat the second car more favourably; this is covered in the article “Two cars, two contracts: how does the bonus work out?”, typical switching mistakes in “Seven common switching mistakes – and how to avoid them”, and a claim during a switch in the article “A claim during the switch: who pays, and what should you do?”.

A grace period starts – under the rules in force, typically 60 days from the due date – during which cover stays in force and the arrears can be paid. If it passes without payment, the policy lapses. What to do: the article on late payment.

A retrospective charge for the calendar days you had no insurance: its rate is published annually (MABISZ publishes it), and it's typically several times the daily level of market premiums. How it works and how to avoid it: the article on the uncovered-period fee.

Typically not for that particular policy period: under the rules in force, you have to take out a new policy with the original insurer, settling the arrears and the uncovered-period fee. The market reopens at your next renewal date. The process: the article on re-taking a policy.

Direct debit – it protects best against forgetfulness; what you need to maintain is the balance in your account and the debit limit. The payment slip is the most vulnerable route. The comparison: the pitfalls of different payment methods.

There are three orderly options: accept it (if it's still competitive on the market), shop around, or switch by the deadline. The worst option is putting the letter aside – without adjusting your transfers and limits, a late payment can result. The process: premium changes at renewal.

This is typically a routine check: the insurer or MABISZ is comparing the details on record – number plate, registered keeper, claims history – and asking you to clarify any mismatch. It's worth taking the letter seriously and replying by the deadline, since unresolved data can cause problems with your claims history or premium calculation. If you're unsure the letter is genuine, it's worth double-checking with the insurer's official customer line: data-verification letters.

Only for the period during which the vehicle is temporarily deregistered – deregistration can be arranged at a government service point, and you may not drive the vehicle while cover is suspended. For a longer period off the road, it can mean real savings: the article on suspending cover.

In their premium tariffs for compulsory motor third-party liability insurance (MTPL), insurers may grant discounts for commitments that save them costs or reduce their risk: electronic communication and an e-policy, annual or half-yearly payment in a single sum, direct debit or bank transfer instead of a postal payment slip (csekk), another contract held with the same insurer (home, casco), and in some tariffs personal characteristics as well – the range and the amount vary by insurer and by tariff, and they are set out in the premium tariff published under the MTPL Act (Gfbt.). The discount is not a gift but the price of the commitment: if the condition is not met – you ask for letters on paper, you switch back to monthly payment by postal slip, the other contract ends, or the information you declared is not true – the insurer may withdraw the discount under the tariff rules and claim the premium difference; from when and how this happens varies from insurer to insurer. With e-communication, the commitment is more than just giving an e-mail address: you undertake to check the documents uploaded to your online customer account, because the insurer typically uploads the premium reminder, the letter about the premium difference and even the notice of termination only there – in a case described by the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT) in 2025, the customer did not see these because of a registration error, and it only came to light at the end of the period that their contract had ended. So the discount is worth it if the commitment matches your real habits: if you are not going to check a customer account, paper is the safer choice; if you commit to paying in a single sum, you need to have the full premium available when it falls due. If you can no longer keep a commitment, it is worth telling the insurer in advance and in writing and asking for the change, because silently failing to comply can end with a premium difference, and an unread reminder with the termination of the contract.

Safety first (hazard lights, hi-vis vest, call 112 if anyone's injured), fill in the blue-and-yellow European Accident Statement (accident report form), take photos of everything, get witnesses' contact details – call the police if there's a dispute or an injury. The full sequence: first steps at the scene.

With the at-fault driver's MTPL insurer – via the claims line or the online portal; the insurer can be looked up from the central register using the number plate. If you have casco, you can choose to use that instead. The process: making a claim as the injured party.

You need to report the incident to your own insurer within the deadline set by the rules in force – your insurer settles with the injured party. Reporting it is simply stating the facts, not admitting fault. Details: reporting as the at-fault driver.

The Compensation Account managed by MABISZ can step in – to settle the claim where the at-fault driver was uninsured, and within the scope set by the rules in force where the at-fault driver is unknown. Reporting it to the police is key here. Details: the Compensation Account.

Yes, within the EEA, without any extra paperwork; for other countries in the Green Card system you may need international proof (a Green Card), which your insurer typically issues free of charge. What to do before you travel: MTPL abroad.

Yes, claims involving personal injury – pain and suffering, loss of earnings, medical costs – are typically assessed on a longer, more document-heavy basis than a purely material claim, and often require medical records as well. For a more serious injury, it's worth bringing in legal or expert help to put the claim together. The first steps of reporting it are still the same as for material damage: personal injury in an MTPL claim.

A routine claim moves fastest through the insurer's claims line – I step in when a case stalls or becomes disputed: sorting out documents, explaining the case based on the terms and conditions, a properly handled complaints route. Exactly who does what: the article on the broker's role.

You may be, but not automatically and not as a “replacement car”: compulsory motor third-party liability insurance (MTPL) covers the liability of the person who caused the damage, and under the full-compensation rule of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.), the loss also includes the costs needed to eliminate the financial disadvantage – so the cost of a hire car is to be reimbursed if you actually needed the use of a car during the repair and the extent of the hire is justified. In practice, a justified extent means three things: in duration, the actual time of the damage assessment and the repair as certified by the garage (for a total loss, the reasonable time needed to replace the car); in category, the same class as the damaged car or a lower one; and in amount, the market rental rate – because of the duty to mitigate the loss, the difference for an unjustifiably long or more expensive hire stays with you, and some insurers also deduct the saving on the kilometres not driven by your own car, which varies from insurer to insurer. The burden of proof is on the injured party: a rental agreement and invoice, the garage’s confirmation of how long the repair took, and evidence of need (commuting to work, no other car in the household) – in a case described by the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT), the insurer reimbursed only a flat-rate amount for additional travel costs because there was no rental agreement or invoice. So do not start by hiring a car: when you report the claim, tell the insurer that you are claiming a hire car, ask in writing what it will accept and for how long, and only then hire one – some insurers provide a hire car through a contracted partner, which is more predictable than settling up afterwards. If the insurer rejects or reduces the item, ask in writing for the compensation offer with reasons for each head of claim, as required by the MTPL Act (Gfbt.), and in the event of a dispute, the route is the complaints procedure, followed by the Financial Arbitration Board or the courts; under your own casco, you are typically entitled to a hire car only if the contract also includes a hire-car add-on or an assistance service of this kind – this varies from insurer to insurer.

Where liability is shared, the insurers determine the proportion of each driver's liability under the rules of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.) – under the rule on collisions between hazardous operations (such as vehicles in traffic), the keepers are liable for the damage caused to each other in proportion to their fault, and the injured party's own contribution must also be taken into account – in practice on the basis of the police report, the accident report form, the photos and the witnesses, typically in a 50–50 or 70–30 ratio. This means that you receive from the other party's MTPL (compulsory motor third-party liability) insurer only the part of your own loss that corresponds to the other party's share of liability (the rest may be covered by your own casco, i.e. comprehensive motor insurance, or you bear it yourself), and likewise the other party receives only part of their loss from your insurer. Since a claim is thus paid under both policies, under the bonus-malus rules both keepers' classes may get worse: the system looks at the claim paid, not at who was at fault and by what percentage – under the bonus-malus decree, the downgrade can be avoided if the keeper repays the amount paid out to the insurer within 45 days of the written notice of the full amount of the payment; with shared liability, this means the smaller amount corresponding to their own share. If you do not agree with the split, you can ask the insurer for a reasoned response to each disputed item, based on the duty to give reasons laid down in the Gfbt. (the Hungarian MTPL Act), and you can submit new evidence (a witness statement, dashcam footage, an expert opinion); then, after a complaint to the insurer, you can turn to the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT) as a private individual (consumer), or otherwise to the courts – the MNB (Hungary's central bank and financial supervisor) does not decide individual liability disputes. The settlement between the two insurers is not your concern; the primary route for reporting a claim is the insurer's claims line, and if a case gets stuck or disputed, I help where I can.

At the scene, collecting information is even more important than usual: the foreign car's registration number and country code, the details of the driver and the keeper, the details of the green card or the certificate of insurance (the insurer's name, the policy number) and the completed accident report form – the European form has the same structure in every language, so the two parties' copies in different languages can still be matched against each other. You report the claim not to the foreign insurer but to its Hungarian correspondent: under the Gfbt. (the Hungarian MTPL Act), the correspondent is the Hungarian insurer or claims-handling organisation designated by an insurer from a country in the green card system to handle damage caused in Hungary by its insured persons – you can find out who the correspondent is, based on the foreign insurer's name, from the Green Card Bureau of MABISZ (the Hungarian insurers' association), which is the National Bureau as defined by the Act – via its website or by enquiry – and if no correspondent has been designated, or the insurer cannot be identified, MABISZ itself is where you can turn. The same claims-settlement deadlines apply to the correspondent and the National Bureau as to Hungarian insurers (15 days from receipt of the necessary documents, and no later than three months from submission of the claim, for a reasoned compensation offer or a reasoned response), but in practice, because cover has to be checked with the foreign insurer, the case typically takes longer than a domestic claim settlement. If the foreign car has no valid insurance, or its insurer cannot be traced, the National Bureau or the compensation scheme managed by MABISZ may step in under the international green card agreements – which one depends on the vehicle's country of origin and the individual circumstances, so in such cases it is worth starting with MABISZ. If you have casco (comprehensive motor insurance), you can also settle the claim with your own insurer, which will later recover the amount from the foreign party; in both cases the primary route for reporting is the claims line of the insurer or the correspondent, and if a case gets stuck, I help where I can.

If you are the innocent injured party, the items in your car – a child seat, phone, laptop, glasses, belongings carried in the boot – count as property damage just like damage to the bodywork, and can be compensated from the at-fault party's MTPL (compulsory motor third-party liability) insurance: the exclusions listed in the Gfbt. (the Hungarian MTPL Act) relate to items placed in the at-fault vehicle and to the at-fault vehicle itself, not to the injured party's. In the at-fault party's own car the situation is different: damage to items carried there is excluded as a general rule, except for items intended for the personal use of those travelling in the car – in other words, the phone or glasses of a passenger in the at-fault car may be compensated, but the driver's own belongings and the cargo may not. Compensation depends on proof: list the items one by one in the claim report itself, photograph the damage, keep the item until the inspection, and attach an invoice or other proof of purchase – under the compensation rules of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.), the insurer typically pays the item's value at the time of the damage, not the price of a new one, and the method varies from insurer to insurer. With a child seat there is an additional consideration: manufacturers recommend replacing it after an accident even if there is no visible damage; Hungarian insurers' practice on this is not uniform: the cost of replacement is typically assessed case by case, on the basis of the severity of the accident, the manufacturer's instructions and the purchase invoice, so state in the claim report whether the child was sitting in it and what kind of impact the seat was exposed to. If the insurer rejects an item, you can ask for a reasoned response for each disputed item, and then, after a complaint, you can turn to the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT) as a private individual (consumer), or otherwise to the courts; the primary route for reporting is the insurer's claims line, and if a case gets stuck, I help where I can.

The process follows from the Gfbt. (the Hungarian MTPL Act): if damage was caused by an uninsured car, the injured party is paid by the Compensation Account (Kártalanítási Számla) managed by MABISZ (the Hungarian insurers' association), and under Section 36 of the Gfbt. the manager of the Account can claim all its outlays and costs connected with satisfying the injured party's claim – from the keeper who had no insurance cover and from the person driving the vehicle, jointly and severally, i.e. the full amount from either of them; so the letter is neither a mistake nor a fine, but a reimbursement claim based on the law. The claim can be disputed on its merits: you can dispute whether you were the keeper at the time of the incident (for example, in the case of a car that was sold but not transferred in the register), whether you caused the damage and to what extent, and also whether the amount paid was justified – to do so, request the relevant documents of the claim file in writing (damage calculation, inspection report, the injured party's statement), and submit your objection with reasons and evidence, because if you stay silent, the manager of the Account can enforce the claim by an order for payment or a lawsuit, and once the decision is final, enforcement may follow. Incidentally, the uninsured keeper was already obliged after the incident to report it to the manager of the Account within 5 working days, partly precisely so that their own account would also become part of the claims settlement – if this was not done, disputing the claim is harder, but not impossible. You can apply for payment in instalments; over what period and on what terms it is granted depends on MABISZ's discretion and the individual case, and it is worth knowing that under the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.), acknowledging the debt – which an instalment agreement may also amount to – interrupts the limitation period. The claim for damages that has passed to the Account is subject to the general five-year limitation period of the Civil Code, which, under the law, is not interrupted by a mere demand for payment but is interrupted by enforcement through the courts – so it is not worth trying to “sit out” the letter; the recovery claim is independent of the no-cover fee (fedezetlenségi díj) charged for the uninsured days, which is a separate item. In a dispute, the route is a written objection to MABISZ and, if necessary, involving a legal adviser; and the very first thing to do is to put insurance in place again, so that no further uninsured days accrue.

In a minor collision involving only material damage, calling the police is not compulsory (if someone is injured, however, the police must be notified under the KRESZ, the Hungarian Highway Code), and the absence of a police on-site investigation is not in itself a reason to reject the claim: the Act on compulsory motor third-party liability (MTPL) insurance (Gfbt.) requires the parties to exchange their details at the scene and then to report the claim – the injured party within 30 days, and the party at fault to their own insurer within 5 working days, naming the authority conducting official proceedings, if there is one – while in practice the accident report form signed by both parties, the photos and the witnesses' contact details are the main tools for establishing liability (the steps to take at the scene are listed in the article “An accident has happened – steps for the first 30 minutes at the scene”). The insurer assesses whether the claim is justified by comparing the liability statement of the party at fault with the facts and data available, and under Section 31 of the Gfbt. it must give a reasoned offer of compensation or a reasoned reply within 15 days of receiving the documents essential for settling the claim, but no later than three months after the claim was submitted – the Act contains no rule that would suspend claim settlement until petty offence or criminal proceedings are closed, so settlement cannot be made dependent merely on the outcome of the proceedings; by the deadline you must receive at least a reasoned reply. The situation is different if the party at fault disputes their liability or the two parties' statements contradict each other: in that case the police report, the petty offence decision or the information on the status and outcome of the proceedings that the insurer may request from the authority under the Act are important evidence, and it does happen that the insurer replies within the deadline that “liability cannot be established”; the route against such a reply is a complaint, then – as a consumer – the Financial Arbitration Board (PBT), and ultimately the courts (details in the article “The party at fault makes no statement and their insurer does not pay: what can the innocent injured party do?”). If you have casco (comprehensive motor insurance), you can report the claim to your own insurer regardless of whether liability has been established, and the casco insurer may later pursue its own recovery claim against the insurer of the party at fault – the conditions for this (deductible, impact on your no-claims bonus) depend on your own casco contract and differ from insurer to insurer.

MTPL (compulsory motor third-party liability insurance) covers damage caused to others through the operation of a motor vehicle, so there is an “other insurer” only if the party that caused the damage was also a motor vehicle: where the damage was caused by a cyclist, a pedestrian or an animal, neither the compulsory insurance nor the Compensation Account (Kártalanítási Számla) comes into play, and you can claim the damage, under the general rules of civil law, from whoever is liable for it (the limits of MTPL are listed in the exclusion-map article “When does the compulsory insurance not pay?”). If a cyclist or pedestrian caused the damage, they are liable under the general compensation rule of the Hungarian Civil Code (Ptk.) unless they prove that their conduct was not culpable, and the damage is paid either by their personal liability insurance – the liability section of most home insurance policies, which, on terms that differ from insurer to insurer, may also cover damage caused by the insured person and the family members living with them as cyclists or pedestrians – or by them personally; at the scene it is therefore worth asking for their name, address and home insurer's details, recording witnesses and taking photos, and bearing in mind that in a collision between a car and a cyclist liability is often shared, because the keeper of the motor vehicle is liable for the cyclist's damage under the stricter rules on extra-hazardous activities. With game, under Section 75/A of the Hunting Act the holder of the hunting rights (the hunting association) is liable for damage caused by game animals under the rules of the Civil Code, and where this liability meets an extra-hazardous activity – such as operating a motor vehicle – the Act requires the rules on the meeting of two extra-hazardous activities to be applied: the damage is divided in proportion to culpability (speed, a wild-animal warning sign, the obligations of the holder of the hunting rights); if neither party is culpable, it is borne by the party within whose sphere of activity the irregularity that led to the damage arose; and if there was no such irregularity either, each party bears its own damage. Since 1 July 2023 the Hunting Act has also provided that the appearance of game on the road as a result of movement arising from its natural way of life does not in itself constitute culpable conduct by the holder of the hunting rights or an irregularity – so compensation is due from the hunting association only if the appearance of the game is connected with its activity, or if some other culpability on its part (for example the absence of a wild-animal warning sign on a section with a particularly high risk of game crossing) can be proved, and the claim must be documented (police action or notification of the holder of the hunting rights, photos, the location of the carcass). With a stray dog or cat or a farm animal that has broken loose, under Section 6:562 of the Civil Code the keeper of the animal is liable unless they prove that they are not culpable in connection with keeping the animal – if the keeper is known, the damage can be claimed from them or from the liability section of their home insurance; if the keeper is unknown, however, in practice there is no one to claim from, and only your own casco (comprehensive motor insurance) remains, which typically pays for a collision with an animal, damage caused by game and a collision with a cyclist as collision damage, subject to the deductible, after which the casco insurer itself pursues its recovery claim against the liable party – if there is anyone to pursue.

I don't charge the client a fee for advice or brokerage – the broker's commission is paid by the insurer, within the framework set by the rules in force. I operate with everything out in the open: full details on the About page.

No. The calculator runs on Eurorisk's system, and the result comes to me – I take a look at it, and a policy is only taken out if you decide to go ahead. The details you need for the quote: quote-request data list.

None of them, "in general": as a broker, I don't recommend a brand – I compare quotes run on your own details, by premium, add-ons and service, in a single table. The insurers compete, the decision is yours. The method: the offer table.

I do not undertake separate renewal-date monitoring: the renewal notice comes from the insurer (for clients who chose electronic communication, Eurorisk's system also sends a notice in good time). What I do undertake: if the notice has arrived, or your renewal date is approaching, and you get in touch, I come with a ready-made offer table and prepare the paperwork for switching. The decision stays yours – meeting the cancellation deadline is legally the policyholder's responsibility. Details: the article on what to do before renewal.

Yes – with several vehicles, a fleet arrangement is typically better value and more transparent; a dedicated site was built for this: flotta.biz. On where the line is drawn: business use.

Yes: alongside your existing policy, I can act on your behalf under a broker mandate – this doesn't involve a new policy, and it doesn't affect your existing terms, premium or bonus-malus class. From that point on, I help with the admin on your policy, and if you get in touch before renewal, I prepare the comparison and the paperwork for the switch. The authorisation is arranged with a simple declaration, just by providing your policy details.

There are two convenient ways: get a quote in minutes with the online calculator, or book a free 20-minute consultation – for a review of your existing policy, your policy document is all you need. I'll take care of the rest.