Insurance Allow Modifications?

[Directasia]

Hi Beehive3783, I've replied to a question on voiding claims elsewhere, so thought I'd reproduce the post here:

 

 

I thought I'd respond to this, as this couldn't be further from the truth. Our approach is to really put the customer's interests at the heart of things, so I can tell you we have absolutely no interest in voiding people's insurance!

 

Since we started we've handled 9,749 car accidents here in Singapore. Of the claims from them we've only rejected 3% of those, and have very happily paid the rest.

 

The biggest cause by far for rejection of claims is fronting - mostly this is young drivers who've declared their parents as the main driver of the car in order to fraudulently get a cheaper premium.

 

We've consistently been an advocate of a fair representation of risk, in order that we can give a competitive premium for all, and in particular that we can have a cheaper premium for those which have the lowest risk - those that appear the best or safe drivers. In order to do that we carefully assess risk, and charge appropriately. If people lie and miss-declare on their quote application then this potentially results in much higher and more frequent payouts, and that cost would then get passed on to the safe majority. That's really unfair on the vast majority of Singaporean drivers. We don't want those that try to fraudulently declare themselves to push up the costs for everyone else .... so we do make sure that we pay out all fair claims, but not where there is obvious manipulation. That's why our claims payout ratio is so high .. we have only ever refused to pay if there's something very wrong going on.

 

We are here to provide the best deal in town, and you buy insurance in order to be covered in a time of need. We are here to provide just that ... security in a time of need.

 

I hope that's of help ....

 

  On 6/18/2013 at 5:28 AM, Beehive3783 said:

And you will have a hard time reading because at the same time you have to smell the sh1t that emits from the fine print because it's pulled out from their ass.

 

Anyway I'm with MSIG. Cheaper premium than both DA and the other fella with TV adverts

Edited June 26, 2013 by Directasia

[Beehive3783]

Well, that's too bad because your online system still quoted more expensive than your competitor. So no chance for me to try DA.

 

And there was a case brought up here about his claim being rejected because of some other modifications that were not related to the accident. No prize for guessing who the insurer was.

 

Have a nice day.

[Directasia]

Hi Ben, and thanks for this. I just posted this on another thread, so thought it might be useful here: If that's the case we do offer our best price guarantee - if your quote elsewhere is cheaper than ours on a like for like basis (i.e. it's the same level of cover offered, same options, same car/driver details, etc - comparing same with same, then we'll not just match that price, but actually pay you twice the difference if you insure with us. I know that's not much help to you now, for which I apologise, but might be good to know in the future?

 

Regarding mods it's perhaps worth saying that the issue for us is very much around whether a car has mods that are approved or not by the LTA. We don't cover cars which have non-approved modifications, and are very clear and upfront about this on our site (and call centre). So if any mods are approved then there are no issues from our side on this. If they aren't approved then we can't offer that person insurance cover.

 

many thanks, and take care ....

 

  On 6/29/2013 at 6:37 AM, Beehive3783 said:

Well, that's too bad because your online system still quoted more expensive than your competitor. So no chance for me to try DA.

 

And there was a case brought up here about his claim being rejected because of some other modifications that were not related to the accident. No prize for guessing who the insurer was.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[Little_prince]

  On 6/26/2013 at 2:55 AM, Directasia said:

Hi Beehive3783, I've replied to a question on voiding claims elsewhere, so thought I'd reproduce the post here:

 

 

I thought I'd respond to this, as this couldn't be further from the truth. Our approach is to really put the customer's interests at the heart of things, so I can tell you we have absolutely no interest in voiding people's insurance!

 

Since we started we've handled 9,749 car accidents here in Singapore. Of the claims from them we've only rejected 3% of those, and have very happily paid the rest.

 

The biggest cause by far for rejection of claims is fronting - mostly this is young drivers who've declared their parents as the main driver of the car in order to fraudulently get a cheaper premium.

 

We've consistently been an advocate of a fair representation of risk, in order that we can give a competitive premium for all, and in particular that we can have a cheaper premium for those which have the lowest risk - those that appear the best or safe drivers. In order to do that we carefully assess risk, and charge appropriately. If people lie and miss-declare on their quote application then this potentially results in much higher and more frequent payouts, and that cost would then get passed on to the safe majority. That's really unfair on the vast majority of Singaporean drivers. We don't want those that try to fraudulently declare themselves to push up the costs for everyone else .... so we do make sure that we pay out all fair claims, but not where there is obvious manipulation. That's why our claims payout ratio is so high .. we have only ever refused to pay if there's something very wrong going on.

 

We are here to provide the best deal in town, and you buy insurance in order to be covered in a time of need. We are here to provide just that ... security in a time of need.

 

I hope that's of help ....

 

3% rejection rate is almost 300 cases rejected.

[Directasia]

Hi Little_prince, that is indeed so. I believe you'll find that's very similar to the rejection rates of other insurance companies across Singapore, who also experience similar levels of fraudulent activity.

 

  On 7/1/2013 at 4:25 AM, Little_prince said:

3% rejection rate is almost 300 cases rejected.

Edited July 1, 2013 by Directasia