Mr Tan,
I read the letter in the Straits Times about the motor insurance claim handled by NTUC Income, the company that you were CEO previously.
Do you agree with the manner in which the claim manager handled the claim? He paid the claim (which the policyholder claimed to be fraudulent, based on the photos taken at the time of the accident).. He told the policyholder to dispute the case on his own in court, if he insist on fighting the claim.
http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/why-was-claim-paid-out-when-car-was-not-damaged#xtor=CS1-10
REPLY
It is possible that NTUC had some reason to believe that the photos provided by the policyholder were not sufficient to dispute the claim.
But, if this was not the case, it would have been better for NTUC to pay the claim (if they decide that it was the best way commercially), and still allow the policyholder to keep his No Claim Discount and renew the policy without any loading.
I read the letter in the Straits Times about the motor insurance claim handled by NTUC Income, the company that you were CEO previously.
Do you agree with the manner in which the claim manager handled the claim? He paid the claim (which the policyholder claimed to be fraudulent, based on the photos taken at the time of the accident).. He told the policyholder to dispute the case on his own in court, if he insist on fighting the claim.
http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/why-was-claim-paid-out-when-car-was-not-damaged#xtor=CS1-10
REPLY
It is possible that NTUC had some reason to believe that the photos provided by the policyholder were not sufficient to dispute the claim.
But, if this was not the case, it would have been better for NTUC to pay the claim (if they decide that it was the best way commercially), and still allow the policyholder to keep his No Claim Discount and renew the policy without any loading.
2 comments:
I had a similar experience with another insurer. It was my fault for hitting the back of the car. However, it was really a slight bump and barely a scratch on the other car's bumper. Nonetheless, the other vehicle claimed injury (oh, all claimed whiplash) and sent the entire family for a medical check up. I remember one of the medical reports - the doctor said he could not find anything wrong with the child and sent them away with Panadol. He noted rather cheekily that the child was playing happily with his siblings when he did the inspection. When I received their lawyer's letter (a small-time law firm, probably ambulance chasers), I asked my insurer how they intended to manage this. They said they will offer to settle at between $2k to $5k per claim. I said, you can't be serious even with such a lame medical report? Their response was, if you do not think this is appropriate, you can take on the legal challenge yourself, which of course I declined. There were at least 5 people in that car so they enjoyed a great payday. In my view, motor insurance is not really insurance but a financing scheme - since they more than get it back later through increased premiums.
When cases go to the Court any claim has to be supported by evidence.
If it is confirmed there was "contact" (kiss,slight tap etc) between vehicle, on the balance of probabilities there will be "damages". The question is how much should this "damage" cost? It could be a replacement or repair. A general situation is own vehicle pls replace everything as much as possible. Other people vehicle just touch up can already.
Post a Comment