Mar 14, 2002 14:14
22 yrs ago
German term
ersetzen
German to English
Bus/Financial
In a declaration of assignment (Abtretungserklaerung)of an insurance company.
Bis zum 08.09.2000 ersetzen wir ...unserer Versicherungsnehmerin einen Betrag in Hoehe von.... fuer einen Schaden ...
Indemnify, compensate? But why the present tense for a date that was well in the past when this letter was written; and why bis zum, unless a series of payments were made.
I do not think the present tense is a typo as it occurs in two letters from two companies on this subject, both in almost identical contexts.
Bis zum 08.09.2000 ersetzen wir ...unserer Versicherungsnehmerin einen Betrag in Hoehe von.... fuer einen Schaden ...
Indemnify, compensate? But why the present tense for a date that was well in the past when this letter was written; and why bis zum, unless a series of payments were made.
I do not think the present tense is a typo as it occurs in two letters from two companies on this subject, both in almost identical contexts.
Proposed translations
(English)
Proposed translations
16 mins
Selected
indemnify or compensate
Either would seem to work. Without more context I am baffled by the present tense. Does the context show whether they actually mad payment or payments?
If they did, then I would simply change the tense. If they didn't, then you may have to write "we would have paid." Mystery!
If they did, then I would simply change the tense. If they didn't, then you may have to write "we would have paid." Mystery!
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Many thanks again."
+2
4 mins
34 mins
By 9-8-2000
By 9-8-2000 we will pay (or will have paid) ... our insured an amount of ...
for damages ...
I don't understand the tense either.
Could the date itself be a typo? Otherwise, more of the letter might help us figure this out.
HTH!
for damages ...
I don't understand the tense either.
Could the date itself be a typo? Otherwise, more of the letter might help us figure this out.
HTH!
+5
1 hr
reimburse
This is my understanding: the insurance taker already paid for the damage, and is now reimbursed by the insurance company.
Peer comment(s):
agree |
Dr Janine Manuel BSc BHB MBChB
59 mins
|
agree |
Eva Blanar
: As to the present tense, my guess is that there were other payments later.
5 hrs
|
agree |
Roddy Stegemann
: Very good take. Reimbursement in the present for payment made in the past.
8 hrs
|
agree |
Barbara Schulten, MSc (OXON), DPSI
19 hrs
|
agree |
msebold
1 day 1 hr
|
3 hrs
Until Aug.9th, 2000, we will damage compensate our insured with an amount not exceeding ...
Trans@gees, it appears as if Aug. 9th, represents a assumed future date, up to which the insurance company would be willing to compensate the insured!
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-14 17:25:26 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
... with an insurance company proposed indemnity! (brute)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-14 17:30:41 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Pardon! \"an assumed ..., of course! (tired brute)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-14 17:25:26 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
... with an insurance company proposed indemnity! (brute)
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-03-14 17:30:41 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
Pardon! \"an assumed ..., of course! (tired brute)
Peer comment(s):
neutral |
Lydia Molea
: it would be "by Aug. 9th, etc. etc."
2 hrs
|
Appreciate your comment, Lydia, though it demonstrates precisely whence "tense confusion" derives; because said Ins. Co. doesn't promise payment "by" Aug. 9th, but baits insured into acceptance of indemnity offer on condition of assent by that date!
|
Something went wrong...