Motor Insurers Should Tackle Root Causes Of Inflated Claims

[Vulcann]

Now he also chup motor insurance liao?

 

Anyway a good reminder article nonetheless

 

Just doubt the relevant folks would listen...

 

From ST Forum:

 

http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-...claims-20121113

 

Motor insurers should tackle root causes of inflated claims

Published on Nov 13, 2012

 

ACCORDING to the General Insurance Association of Singapore, regulations introduced in May last year require motorists making property damage claims to give other motorists or their insurers the opportunity to inspect the damage to the vehicles before repairs are undertaken ("Pre-repair inspection rule for accident vehicles"; last Friday).

 

The association should state the percentage of third-party claims that follow this regulation.

 

Anecdotal evidence indicates that payments for third-party damages continue to be high, contributing to hefty motor insurance premiums.

 

Also, are a significant proportion of these claims made through lawyers, and do their fees add to the cost of the claims?

 

Perhaps the insurer paying the claim should also be given the opportunity to settle it without the need to incur legal fees.

 

The requirement to report directly to the paying insurer should be made mandatory by law, rather than being a non-binding regulation by the insurance industry. This will be more effective in addressing the exorbitant cost of third-party claims.

 

In my consulting work in the region, I know that the cost of motor repairs in Singapore is several times that in neighbouring countries.

 

While this can be partly explained by the higher cost of doing business here, the scale of the difference indicates that there are other contributing factors.

 

The motor insurance industry should address the root causes of inflated claims and bring relief to consumers, who now continue to suffer increases in premiums.

 

Tan Kin Lian

 

President

 

Financial Services Consumer Association

[Cba6p]

reminded me a fxcker claimed $3500 (down from $6000+) from my insurer for a few line of scratches on this swift rear bumper...

[Vulcann]

reminded me a fxcker claimed $3500 (down from $6000+) from my insurer for a few line of scratches on this swift rear bumper...

 

So hiong?

 

Your insurer didn't challenge the bugger meh? :angry:

[Cba6p]

So hiong?

Your insurer didn't challenge the bugger meh? :angry:

 

for what? Isn't to pay up and impose loading to me an easier way out?

[Passion]

So how I think how the insurance run the show needs to change. What is the point of buying insurance? To safeguard interest after accident happen? If so, why need to penalize driver for claiming? No business is sure earn one. Want to be in this business, prepare to lose some, earn some. Nobody wants an accident to happen. The current system is faulting owner who met an accident. If owner no accident, insurance got refund part of the premium to us? Answer is no. Where the hell in the world earn business like that? It is just like gambling, got buy means got chance of opening, got insurance means got protection. If accident, insurer just pay the differences just like dealer pay player payout from company own pocket.

 

In short, doing business is just like gambling. Some times you win, sometimes you lose. No business actually win all the way like how our insurance works.

[Eyke]

reminded me a fxcker claimed $3500 (down from $6000+) from my insurer for a few line of scratches on this swift rear bumper...

 

even change bumper + spray + 1 day loss of use oso max $1.2K...