I REFER to Wednesday's report, "Insurer drops client who queried other driver's claim". It highlighted a case where our policyholder did not have her motor insurance coverage renewed, following her query of another driver's claim.
We wish to clarify that the decision not to renew the coverage was not prompted by the policyholder's decision to query the third party claim. Instead, it was due to our concern that we have not been able to meet the policyholder's service expectations, despite our best efforts to assist her. Our decision also stemmed from her failure to cooperate and extend her assistance in a timely manner to meet the court's deadlines, despite numerous reminders by our lawyer and the considerable resources spent to gather evidence.
We had explained the rationale and furnished facts supporting our decision to the reporter prior to the report's publication.
Our policy has always been to settle such cases in a fair and commercially efficient manner, by following the standard industry practice in motor insurance for claims settlement. This is where the insurer will negotiate to settle third party claims at a reasonable amount, instead of paying them outright without question.
Inflated claims are one of the common problems the industry is facing; however, we are prepared to investigate such cases as long as the policyholder is willing to work with us. Such claims are always scrutinised carefully with the assistance of independent surveyors, medical and other experts where necessary. Further, the report incorrectly stated that our appointed surveyor for the re-inspection of the third party vehicle was the same one that did the first inspection. We would like to clarify that the third party driver did report the accident at a report centre owned by the surveyor, but there was no inspection done on the vehicle. Hence, there was only one third party vehicle inspection done by the appointed surveyor.
Pui Phusangmook
SVP & General Manager
General Insurance Division NTUC Income
EDITOR'S NOTE: There are differences in how both parties - NTUC Income and the Amiruls - have described the events that transpired, and we are satisfied that we presented a fair account.
