Insurance providers in the country will not be permitted to stretch the timeline for vehicle repairs under existing insurance agreements, a stance voiced by Sergei Mironov, the leader of Just Russia – For Truth, during a discussion with socialbites.ca. He spoke with clear conviction about why delaying repairs serves no legitimate purpose and only burdens car owners who rely on timely service after incidents or breakdowns.
Mironov stated, “Here I am categorically against it. I do not see any compelling reasons to delay work and force people to wait for cars from the service center.” His remarks underscored a broader debate about balancing insurer efficiency with consumer rights and the practical needs of drivers who depend on their vehicles for daily life and work.
Earlier this year, the Federation Council explored raising the maximum repair window for vehicles under compulsory automobile insurance from 30 days to 45 days. The Ministry of Finance signaled support for this idea, but the proposal has since been put on hold, with Izvestia citing a source inside the insurance market to explain the pause. The potential change, if enacted, would have implications for both foreign and domestic car owners, prompting questions about parts supply, repair capacity, and the administrative workload on service centers and insurers alike.
Industry observers have warned that a longer repair period could affect the reliability and availability of vehicles for commuters, families, and businesses that rely on dependable transportation. Ilya Smirnov, who leads the Insurance Market Department at the Central Bank, cautioned that difficulties in sourcing spare parts for European cars may be cited by insurers as a reason to justify delays with vehicles from abroad. At the same time, he noted the risk that Russian-made vehicles could face similar delays if the market adapts to a longer repair horizon, potentially impacting consumer confidence and market stability in the short term.
The discussion also touches on the administrative aspects of OSAGO repairs and how these processes interact with broader policy goals such as transparency, affordability, and timely recovery of vehicular use after damage. In this context, there has been speculation about the possibility of approving repairs with used spare parts within the OSAGO framework, a topic that has previously circulated in legislative discussions. Such proposals, if implemented, would require careful evaluation of safety standards, warranty considerations, and consumer protections to ensure that cost savings do not come at the expense of vehicle safety or long-term reliability.
Ultimately, the core issue remains the balance between rapid restoration of vehicle functionality and the financial and logistical realities faced by insurers, service centers, and vehicle owners. The ongoing debates reflect broader concerns about how insurance contracts are structured in a way that supports prompt repairs while maintaining healthy competition and adequate oversight. As the dialogue continues, stakeholders are weighing practical outcomes against regulatory ambitions to determine the best path forward for the automotive insurance market in both domestic and foreign contexts.