Re: Ma Chi's family sues insurers AXA after they withdraw coverage for deadly 'collis
The question will be: who will compensate the victims? The insurance company or the deceased estate?
so does that mean all the victims are screwed? no compensation until the case settle?
The question will be: who will compensate the victims? The insurance company or the deceased estate?
Like that taxi driver and passenger also not paid.
They got killed in a collision not an accident.
What has Ma Chi's assets got to do with AXA and the law suit?
Insurance company alway wants to disclaim liability, accident is an accident,
they want to runaway with it! no wonder when I was young i ALWAYS hear
old ppl saying "Insurance eat ppl"
When Ma Chi bought this Ferrari Insurance happily accept with open arms why ??
premium super high! they know this is a damn fast car!!
AXA should not have accpted in the first place, why when accident happened than they claim
its not accident???
Sign white paper not say its Black!! AXA?? I am not trying to side anyone!
But AXA please be FAIR in your judgement!
All current Ferrari drivers take note, your next knock knock!!
AXA will denied your claim~!
In the event AXA needs to payout to his victims....they will sue MaChi and claim from him.
Apparently now 3rd parties also jam and won't get compensation....yet.
‘’The poor taxi driver and his passenger did not die in a collision . They died in a PAP and FT collusion !
For the avoidance of doubt regarding the respective liabilities (immediate vs.eventual) ('offending driver' vs his insurer) towards compensating victims (3rd party), the following case example remains instructive.
Victim wins civil suit against Ionescu
Mr Bong has sought more than $630k in damages. The default judgment was given to Ionescu, but the amount of damages to be paid will be decided later. -TNP
Sat, Aug 21, 2010; The New Paper
Exclusion clause
If a driver is convicted or pleads guilty to drink driving, the insurer's exclusion clause kicks in and
the insurer can disclaim liability, he said.
But as laid out in the affidavit, even though NTUC Income is "no longer contractually bound to indemnify" Ionescu,
the insurer is still required by law to pay Mr Bong first.
It will then recover the amount from Ionescu.
This is also
a standard procedure in road accidents where the driver is intoxicated, said Mr K Anparasan, 42, partner at law firm KhattarWong.
He explained: "Even if the driver is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, the insurer is required to pay the victim of the accident.
"The whole idea is to make sure the victim is not left uncompensated. The insurer reserves the right to go after the driver to recover that amount."
Mr Ken Loh, 43, managing director of insurance agency M Plus Consultancy, added:
"The law is made to protect the innocent, so that the accident victims do not suffer loss without redress. If no one pays their bills, then public interest is hurt."
Victim wins civil suit against Ionescu
=====
Rest of the details pls see (or ask your MP to explain):
'Motor Vehicles (Third-Party Risks and Compensation) Act (CHAPTER 189)'