-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
3rd party insurance claim
- Thread starter dietcoke
- Start date
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
he was hit behind by another car and you want him to claim against his own insurance???
they can earn abit more lah...
There 2 ways to approach this.
The first is to claim your own insurance and let them sort it out with the other party's insurance. This ensures minimal inconvenience but it largely dependent on the policy you have. Given that it is a straight forward case, liability should be beyond 60% hence NCB will not be affected.
The second is to wait till the other party's insurance agrees to pay for the damages. Now,if the vehicle can still be driven, fine. But what if the trunk lid cannot be close and when it rains all the water seeps into the trunk and "short" the electrical components?
If you proceed with the repair without first getting the liability cleared by the insurance, you're exposing yourself to bear the repair cost. Hence in this case, the lawyers are needed.
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
>
dear Yos , you are not incorrect, but depend on who you give
this advice to lah ...
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
>
when chips are down even father mother can sue
each other childrens to get insurance. the same
children can sue father mother to claims insurance.
but insurers Not born yesterday ....
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
2 charged for false motor insurance claim
They cooked up a story about a fake car accident. -ST
Fri, Jun 11, 2010
The Straits Times
By Elena Chong
TWO men were charged last Friday with conspiring with another to cook up a story about a fake car accident and making a false insurance claim over it.
Andy Ong Thiam Chuan, 32, and Charlie Ong Han Wee, 31, are accused of engaging with Mr Tay Kok Leong to cheat AIG Insurance in August 2007.
The pair are said to have stated false witness and accident details in an accident statement at a Kim Chuan Terrace motor workshop, on a form given to AXA Insurance to process the claim from AIG Insurance.
Based on this form, AIG paid out the claim to them. The charges did not specify the amount claimed.
However, The Straits Times reported Friday that the claims came up to more than $14,000.
Ship broker Henry Phua, 61, who was the driver of the other car involved in the accident, won a two-year battle against being blamed for the crash.
At a dispute resolution meeting presided by a district judge, the other driver capitulated and said Mr Phua had not cut into his lane as he had claimed. He also admitted there had been no witnesses to the accident on the Central Expressway.
After that, Mr Phua made a police report against the driver.
Andy Ong Thiam Chuan. -ST photo
Charlie Ong faces a second charge of helping Mr Tay to give false information to the police on how the latter was involved in the accident along the Central Expressway.
He allegedly lied that Andy Ong was a witness to the accident.
Charlie Ong and Andy Ong were represented by lawyers yesterday and they are due back in court on different dates later this month.
If convicted of cheating, each can be jailed for up to seven years and fined.
The maximum penalty for giving false information to a public servant is a jail term of up to six months or a fine of up to $1,000, or both.
Mr Tay has not been charged.
Read also:
Two fights won against false accident claims
This article was first published in The Straits Times
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
16 people charged with making false motor insurance claims
Claims ranged from $4,000 to $10,000 each. -AsiaOne
Sat, Jun 26, 2010
AsiaOne
SINGAPORE: 16 people have been charged with making false motor-injury claims.
The largest group of suspects in recent memory were reported to have engaged law firms to begin personal-injury proceedings against motor insurers.
Their claims range from $4,000 to $10,000 each, for injuries that were allegedly made up, The Straits Times reported.
In some cases, the accused were not even at the scene of the accidents.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
THE Motor Insurance Taskforce on Thursday released its set of recommendations to curb inflated and fraudulent claims that insurers say have been driving up the cost of premiums.
Their nine-point wish list covered areas across the industry, such as introducing itemised workshop billing, making touting a criminal offence, and forming an association to regulate surveyors.
The taskforce, which was formed by the Automobile Association of Singapore and the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case), came up with the list after meetings over the last six months with industry players.
It will now spend the next six months working with various agencies, including the Land Transport Authority and the Traffic Police, to first convince them of the benefits of the changes before putting the changes in place.
Said Case president Yeo Guat Kwang: 'If all the recommendations are put in place, we are confident it will address the concerns that made us set up the taskforce in the first place.'
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
when chips are down even father mother can sue
each other childrens to get insurance. the same
children can sue father mother to claims insurance.
but insurers
Not born yesterday ....$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
2 charged for false motor insurance claim
They cooked up a story about a fake car accident. -ST
Fri, Jun 11, 2010
The Straits Times
By Elena Chong
TWO men were charged last Friday with conspiring with another to cook up a story about a fake car accident and making a false insurance claim over it.
Andy Ong Thiam Chuan, 32, and Charlie Ong Han Wee, 31, are accused of engaging with Mr Tay Kok Leong to cheat AIG Insurance in August 2007.
The pair are said to have stated false witness and accident details in an accident statement at a Kim Chuan Terrace motor workshop, on a form given to AXA Insurance to process the claim from AIG Insurance.
Based on this form, AIG paid out the claim to them. The charges did not specify the amount claimed.
However, The Straits Times reported Friday that the claims came up to more than $14,000.
Ship broker Henry Phua, 61, who was the driver of the other car involved in the accident, won a two-year battle against being blamed for the crash.
At a dispute resolution meeting presided by a district judge, the other driver capitulated and said Mr Phua had not cut into his lane as he had claimed. He also admitted there had been no witnesses to the accident on the Central Expressway.
After that, Mr Phua made a police report against the driver.
Andy Ong Thiam Chuan. -ST photo
Charlie Ong faces a second charge of helping Mr Tay to give false information to the police on how the latter was involved in the accident along the Central Expressway.
He allegedly lied that Andy Ong was a witness to the accident.
Charlie Ong and Andy Ong were represented by lawyers yesterday and they are due back in court on different dates later this month.
If convicted of cheating, each can be jailed for up to seven years and fined.
The maximum penalty for giving false information to a public servant is a jail term of up to six months or a fine of up to $1,000, or both.
Mr Tay has not been charged.
Read also:
Two fights won against false accident claims
This article was first published in The Straits Times
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
16 people charged with making false motor insurance claims
Claims ranged from $4,000 to $10,000 each. -AsiaOne
Sat, Jun 26, 2010
AsiaOne
SINGAPORE: 16 people have been charged with making false motor-injury claims.
The largest group of suspects in recent memory were reported to have engaged law firms to begin personal-injury proceedings against motor insurers.
Their claims range from $4,000 to $10,000 each, for injuries that were allegedly made up, The Straits Times reported.
In some cases, the accused were not even at the scene of the accidents.
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
THE Motor Insurance Taskforce on Thursday released its set of recommendations to curb inflated and fraudulent claims that insurers say have been driving up the cost of premiums.
Their nine-point wish list covered areas across the industry, such as introducing itemised workshop billing, making touting a criminal offence, and forming an association to regulate surveyors.
The taskforce, which was formed by the Automobile Association of Singapore and the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case), came up with the list after meetings over the last six months with industry players.
It will now spend the next six months working with various agencies, including the Land Transport Authority and the Traffic Police, to first convince them of the benefits of the changes before putting the changes in place.
Said Case president Yeo Guat Kwang: 'If all the recommendations are put in place, we are confident it will address the concerns that made us set up the taskforce in the first place.'
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
dear Yos , you are not incorrect, but depend on who you give
this advice to lah ...
There is always many ways to get something done.
Road traffic accidents can get very traumatic especially when you put your car in the wrong hands. Some of these workshops scam for a living and no matter how cautions you are, you'll be bitten.
I prefer to take a safe approach here.
I've always sent my car back to the distributor for repairs unless I have the intention to sell it after the accident.
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
There is always many ways to get something done.
Road traffic accidents can get very traumatic especially when you put your car in the wrong hands. Some of these workshops scam for a living and no matter how cautions you are, you'll be bitten.
I prefer to take a safe approach here.
I've always sent my car back to the distributor for repairs unless I have the intention to sell it after the accident.
... now you know why some come to this forum ???
... now you know why some come to this forum ???
You lost me there...
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
>
let's move on ... yr postings will be useful as a source
of future reference for people with 3rd party claim ...
the ones that will repair, let u drive off without paying and get their lawyer to do the claim are the ones that are confident of getting paid. the actual repair costs, the workshop and their lawyer will negotiate with the other party insurance co to reach a settle amount.
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
.
Case: Do away with third-party claims
Case proposes changes to clean up the motor insurance industry.
Sun, Jun 07, 2009
The Straits Times
By Christopher Tan, Senior Correspondent
RADICAL proposals are being considered by the consumer watchdog and motor insurance industry to clamp down on a scourge of insurers and motorists: inflated claims.
The Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) has suggested doing away with third-party claims, in favour of a "no-fault regime", which exists in one form or another in countries like New Zealand, Canada and the United States. In a no-fault system, motorists will make claims against their own insurer in an accident, whether they are at fault or not. This removes disputes and theoretically reduces claims costs and, eventually, premiums. Case president Yeo Guat Kwang said it has discussed the no-fault regime with the General Insurance Association (GIA).
He added that "the reception was quite positive".
Nowadays, claims involve many parties - lawyers and even doctors...this will definitely cost more," said Mr Yeo.
After roping in the Automobile Association of Singapore (AAS) for feedback, Case and GIA will table a joint proposal to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) later this month.
The new suggestion comes on the back of skyrocketing claims, which have driven motor insurance rates up in turn.
Last year, motor claims hit a record $742 million, leading to motor insurers suffering an underwriting loss of $214 million, an all-time high.
The increase has occurred despite repeated efforts over the last two decades to stamp out inflated and fraudulent claims, including instituting independent damage assessment centres and encouraging motorists to make on-the-spot accident statements.
Much finger-pointing has taken place as a result. The GIA has blamed motor workshops, lawyers and doctors for fraudulent claims. These groups, however, say the insurance industry needs to take a harder look at itself ? specifically how it investigates claims.
Meanwhile, motorists are decrying the rise in premiums, and say they are at the mercy of insurers.
Case's Mr Yeo also highlighted that laws in Singapore which govern motor insurance were enacted more than 60 years ago, and need revising.
Another change Case is proposing is making accident statements legally binding.
READ MORE
- $19k repair bill and 400% increase in insurance premium
- GIA president: Motorists here are pampered
"Right now, it is just a piece of paper, and insurers who suspect that someone is not telling the whole truth can't do anything about it," he said.
But if these reports are statutory declarations, a person can be taken to task if he is found to be not telling the truth or concealing relevant information.
Mr Yeo also said insurers need to be more transparent about what goes into the cost of a premium.
"Commission makes up as much as 15 per cent of the cost," he said. "This is quite high. If it can be brought down by 10 per cent I'm sure many motorists will be happy."
Case and the AAS are putting together a "stakeholders' committee", which will include insurers, as well as the relevant authorities, to look at how things can be improved.
"We hope to receive more suggestions from the public," he said, adding that feedback can be sent to Case or the AAS.
Commenting on the no-fault proposal, GIA president Derek Teo said: "We like the idea, but we have to evaluate it carefully to examine all the pros and cons.
"It is a change that is very drastic."
Another insurer said no-fault insurance "may work against good drivers".
In countries which have adopted such a regime, several have decided recently to move towards a hybrid system that allows negligence cases to be pursued in court. This apparently fixes a shortcoming in a purely no-fault system - some see it as being too easy on bad drivers.
The GIA does not have readily available data on how no-fault regimes actually affect premiums.
But a study done by California's Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in 2005 found states which had one form of no-fault system or another had higher average motor premiums than those which did not.
[email protected]
Case: Do away with third-party claims
Case proposes changes to clean up the motor insurance industry.
Sun, Jun 07, 2009
The Straits Times
By Christopher Tan, Senior Correspondent
RADICAL proposals are being considered by the consumer watchdog and motor insurance industry to clamp down on a scourge of insurers and motorists: inflated claims.
The Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) has suggested doing away with third-party claims, in favour of a "no-fault regime", which exists in one form or another in countries like New Zealand, Canada and the United States. In a no-fault system, motorists will make claims against their own insurer in an accident, whether they are at fault or not. This removes disputes and theoretically reduces claims costs and, eventually, premiums. Case president Yeo Guat Kwang said it has discussed the no-fault regime with the General Insurance Association (GIA).
He added that "the reception was quite positive".
Nowadays, claims involve many parties - lawyers and even doctors...this will definitely cost more," said Mr Yeo.
After roping in the Automobile Association of Singapore (AAS) for feedback, Case and GIA will table a joint proposal to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) later this month.
The new suggestion comes on the back of skyrocketing claims, which have driven motor insurance rates up in turn.
Last year, motor claims hit a record $742 million, leading to motor insurers suffering an underwriting loss of $214 million, an all-time high.
The increase has occurred despite repeated efforts over the last two decades to stamp out inflated and fraudulent claims, including instituting independent damage assessment centres and encouraging motorists to make on-the-spot accident statements.
Much finger-pointing has taken place as a result. The GIA has blamed motor workshops, lawyers and doctors for fraudulent claims. These groups, however, say the insurance industry needs to take a harder look at itself ? specifically how it investigates claims.
Meanwhile, motorists are decrying the rise in premiums, and say they are at the mercy of insurers.
Case's Mr Yeo also highlighted that laws in Singapore which govern motor insurance were enacted more than 60 years ago, and need revising.
Another change Case is proposing is making accident statements legally binding.
READ MORE
- $19k repair bill and 400% increase in insurance premium
- GIA president: Motorists here are pampered
"Right now, it is just a piece of paper, and insurers who suspect that someone is not telling the whole truth can't do anything about it," he said.
But if these reports are statutory declarations, a person can be taken to task if he is found to be not telling the truth or concealing relevant information.
Mr Yeo also said insurers need to be more transparent about what goes into the cost of a premium.
"Commission makes up as much as 15 per cent of the cost," he said. "This is quite high. If it can be brought down by 10 per cent I'm sure many motorists will be happy."
Case and the AAS are putting together a "stakeholders' committee", which will include insurers, as well as the relevant authorities, to look at how things can be improved.
"We hope to receive more suggestions from the public," he said, adding that feedback can be sent to Case or the AAS.
Commenting on the no-fault proposal, GIA president Derek Teo said: "We like the idea, but we have to evaluate it carefully to examine all the pros and cons.
"It is a change that is very drastic."
Another insurer said no-fault insurance "may work against good drivers".
In countries which have adopted such a regime, several have decided recently to move towards a hybrid system that allows negligence cases to be pursued in court. This apparently fixes a shortcoming in a purely no-fault system - some see it as being too easy on bad drivers.
The GIA does not have readily available data on how no-fault regimes actually affect premiums.
But a study done by California's Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in 2005 found states which had one form of no-fault system or another had higher average motor premiums than those which did not.
[email protected]
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
.
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2007/05/dispute-on-claims-made-by-third-party.html
.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Dispute on third party claim
Dear Mr Tan
I have a third party motor insurance policy with NTUC. I greatly appreciate that you had led NTUC to reduce fradulent claims and thereby bring down the premiums.
I have a specific case. I agree that NTUC should compensate to the third party, but I dispute the quantum. How do the surveyors determine the damage that is caused due to the accident?
I followed up after 6 weeks and found that NTUC had paid the compensation to the third party claim against my policy.
NTUC requested that I sign and return a statement to dispute any of the damages from the photographs. What will happen after I sign this statement?
I thought NTUC has a team of professionals to ascertain the damages caused, why NTUC need me to sign and return the statement to dispute part of the damages ?
I was told over the telephone that there is a team to assess and award claims. How can I meet this team in person to discuss this claim ?
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2007/05/dispute-on-claims-made-by-third-party.html
.
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Dispute on third party claim
Dear Mr Tan
I have a third party motor insurance policy with NTUC. I greatly appreciate that you had led NTUC to reduce fradulent claims and thereby bring down the premiums.
I have a specific case. I agree that NTUC should compensate to the third party, but I dispute the quantum. How do the surveyors determine the damage that is caused due to the accident?
I followed up after 6 weeks and found that NTUC had paid the compensation to the third party claim against my policy.
NTUC requested that I sign and return a statement to dispute any of the damages from the photographs. What will happen after I sign this statement?
I thought NTUC has a team of professionals to ascertain the damages caused, why NTUC need me to sign and return the statement to dispute part of the damages ?
I was told over the telephone that there is a team to assess and award claims. How can I meet this team in person to discuss this claim ?
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
.
http://www.fairpriceplus.com/help/faq/faq_Motor_Claims.shtm#1
.
Motor Claims FAQ
What do I do if I am involved in an accident and no injury occurs?
What do I do if I am involved in an accident and injury occurs?
What is Non-Injury Motor Accident Report Scheme?
How To Make An Own Damage Claim for Repair of Your Vehicle?
What if my Accident Occurs in Malaysia?
What is Standard Execss and Transport Allowance?
What will happen to Third Party Claims?
How is my vehicle repaired in times of an Accident?
What if spare parts are unavailable during repair?
http://www.fairpriceplus.com/help/faq/faq_Motor_Claims.shtm#1
.
Motor Claims FAQ
What do I do if I am involved in an accident and no injury occurs?
What do I do if I am involved in an accident and injury occurs?
What is Non-Injury Motor Accident Report Scheme?
How To Make An Own Damage Claim for Repair of Your Vehicle?
What if my Accident Occurs in Malaysia?
What is Standard Execss and Transport Allowance?
What will happen to Third Party Claims?
How is my vehicle repaired in times of an Accident?
What if spare parts are unavailable during repair?
guys, after reading so many fradulent cases, i'm sure i'm not one of them. i just want to settle this case asap, cos i need my car. however, i'm not sure how 'clean' that workshop is. cos now my car is having its repair carried out. dunno what implications will it has if i 'choose' to take my car out to other workshops.
to YH: i have not yet appointed a lawyer. however, the workshop people advised me to use their workshop 'appointed' lawyer. is it safe, put in the eyes of bystanders, to allow the workshop 'appointed' lawyers to help claim on my behalf?
to everyone: what if i chose not to appoint any lawyer? will it affect my case? (e.g. recovering of money, time of recovery etc)
to YH: i have not yet appointed a lawyer. however, the workshop people advised me to use their workshop 'appointed' lawyer. is it safe, put in the eyes of bystanders, to allow the workshop 'appointed' lawyers to help claim on my behalf?
to everyone: what if i chose not to appoint any lawyer? will it affect my case? (e.g. recovering of money, time of recovery etc)
Y
Yip Hon
Guest
. dear bro i am leaving sing for half a day ...
if what u said about yr accident is true then u have no worry...
just use their lawyers but let them confirm that u do not have
to pay lawyer a single cents .
bring along your voice recording device ... good luck ...
I really dun understand how come lawyers has to come into the picture if its a straight forward claim. Even if B wants the claimant to use his workshop to do the repairs, normally it would be a case of either B has good kang tow and get it done cheaper, in which case B would probably want to foot the bill outside of insurance claim. Or B is in cahoots with the workshop to inflate repair cost so that they can claim against his insurance and pocket the additional on the side.
In my case same thing got bang in the rear and guy admit liability and want to settle on the side. Immediately got him to put it down in black and white and luckily I did that cos later he did not agreed to the sum for repairs and I made report to my own insurance and brought vehicle to their approved repair workshop to access damage. Got it repaired but when it came to my insurance renewal suddenly hit a snag my NCD was removed, cos they said I made a claim against my own insurance and also apparently the claims issue between both insurance has yet to be settled.
Well lucky for me, I had the other party admission of liability as proof and had my NCD restored. If not lang lang had to go thru one big mess trying to sort this out.
In my case same thing got bang in the rear and guy admit liability and want to settle on the side. Immediately got him to put it down in black and white and luckily I did that cos later he did not agreed to the sum for repairs and I made report to my own insurance and brought vehicle to their approved repair workshop to access damage. Got it repaired but when it came to my insurance renewal suddenly hit a snag my NCD was removed, cos they said I made a claim against my own insurance and also apparently the claims issue between both insurance has yet to be settled.
Well lucky for me, I had the other party admission of liability as proof and had my NCD restored. If not lang lang had to go thru one big mess trying to sort this out.
Last edited:
This post by LonewolfAlfa is very true, encountered a lot of cases like that, many of them will even just fix for you without taking a single cent while they
fight for your case. If they lose, many would still not claim anything from you.
They are just asking for you to allow them to act on your behalf.
Quote:
but sometimes in straight forward cases like this, the workshop will just proceed with the repairs, and they help you claim from the other party as they are confident that they can recover the costs plus profits. the workshop's appointed laywer will do the claim however they do need your authorisation to claim on your behalf.
so u need to sign the authorization letter from the lawyer in order for them to act on your behalf and once the claim has been settled, u will need to sign a release letter. U dont need to fork out a single cent.[/QUOTE]
fight for your case. If they lose, many would still not claim anything from you.
They are just asking for you to allow them to act on your behalf.
Quote:
but sometimes in straight forward cases like this, the workshop will just proceed with the repairs, and they help you claim from the other party as they are confident that they can recover the costs plus profits. the workshop's appointed laywer will do the claim however they do need your authorisation to claim on your behalf.
so u need to sign the authorization letter from the lawyer in order for them to act on your behalf and once the claim has been settled, u will need to sign a release letter. U dont need to fork out a single cent.[/QUOTE]
Similar threads
