Jump to content

Rental company insists NSF owes it $67,000


Mustank
 Share

Recommended Posts

What is the difference btw collision and accident? How come the rental company can deem that it's a collision and not accident?

 

The bigger question looms, that is how come the rental company got the effrontery to deem itself as an authorised entity to pass judgement on this matter? Oh, did we miss something like maybe the company was also doubling as an underwriter? [rolleyes]

Edited by Happily1986
Link to post
Share on other sites

can the company take the money from Tan father and son, then claim insurance?

 

take money from both sides!

 

 

that's what i thought too.... [sly]

Link to post
Share on other sites

can the company take the money from Tan father and son, then claim insurance?

 

take money from both sides!

 

I more suspect no buy rental insurance [sly]

Link to post
Share on other sites

"So we told the father that his son admitted he caused the crash because he was tired. This is deemed a collision and not an accident," he added.

 

Though he did not elaborate, he might have been referring to the highly-publicised case involving Chinese national Ma Chi, who died after crashing his Ferrari at Bugis on May 12. The insurers, AXA, are arguing before the courts that the incident was a collision and not an accident.

 

ruled the insurer or is the rental company just say only? If insurers, Ma Chi case has really set the precedence to deny claims [shakehead]

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the difference btw collision and accident? How come the rental company can deem that it's a collision and not accident?

imho

accident is unintentional.

collision is intentional or due to negligence

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

imho

accident is unintentional.

collision is intentional or due to negligence

 

intentional risk taking behaviour aside, who really wants to intentionally wreck the car? lets leave out the fraudsters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Collision is self deemed by the rental company - where got insurance company say so before even make report?

 

Seems most likely explanation is

a) gangster company

b) Not a proper rental car

c) Their insurance cover wouldn't have included this driver, but they close one eye and rent

 

Less likely explanation

Insurance is an optional extra and kayu driver never buy

Link to post
Share on other sites

imho

accident is unintentional.

collision is intentional or due to negligence

every accident are usually due to someone negligence wor. how can justify in this formate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i think no matter what, the driver is only liable for the excess. the rest of the loss the rental company has to claim from insurance company or bear it themself.

Edited by Vextan
Link to post
Share on other sites

for the yong and starfocus case...

 

yong was fined and banned from driving 1 yr.... how about star focus? deemd not at fault?

 

Ehhhhhh I don't know [:(]

Link to post
Share on other sites

imho

accident is unintentional.

collision is intentional or due to negligence

 

If that being said, tailgating the car in front and crash into it should be consider a collision since tailgating is intentional and therefore should not be able to claim from insurance?

 

It's so grey in this area......

 

If I'm not wrong Ma Chi case still not closed yet right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

every accident are usually due to someone negligence wor. how can justify in this formate.

 

just word definition lah bro.

no intent to categorize, nor i agree with anything ^_^

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...