Search the Community

https://www.asiaone.com/singapore/town-council-rejected-compensating-me-driver-loss-after-volkswagen-damaged-spalling 'Town council rejected compensating me': Driver at loss after Volkswagen damaged by spalling concrete at Tekka Centre carpark July 26, 2022 published at 1:48 PMByOng Su Mann A Volkswagen Golf was damaged by spalling concrete from the ceiling in the basement carpark of Tekka Centre. Stomp The owner of a Volkswagen Golf damaged by spalling concrete from the ceiling in the basement carpark of Tekka Centre wants to be compensated by the town council. But the loss adjusters appointed by the liability insurer of Tanjong Pagar Town Council (TPTC) have found that the spalling concrete is due to natural wear and tear, and the town council is not liable for the incident. More from AsiaOneRead the condensed version of this story, and other top stories with NewsLite. Tekka Centre is at 665 Buffalo Road, which is part of Tanjong Pagar GRC. According to the Ministry of National Development, spalling concrete is the flaking of concrete from the ceiling due to the corrosion of steel reinforcement bars in the concrete floor slab. The corrosion is caused by the ingress of moisture and acidic elements and can lead to cracking and bulging of the concrete cover over time. This is a natural wear and tear process and is generally a surface maintenance issue which can be mitigated through a regular painting of the ceiling. All that is little comfort to Stomp contributor Omar, whose car was damaged in the Tekka Centre carpark on April 22. Sharing photos of the incident with Stomp, he said: "Upon months of fighting with the town council, their loss adjusters had said this was caused by wear and tear. "The town council has rejected compensating me or even giving me an apology. "The cost of repairs quoted by my insurance was nearly up to $8,000. I have not repaired it as I seek justice. "Many of my friends have asked me to take it to social media. but due to my work, I can't. "They have simply told me to claim insurance, which I don't want to do because I have to face the 30 per cent no-claim discount deduction and premium rise. Why must I face the music due to their contractor's negligence? What if someone had walked there that day, would they also categorise it as wear and tear? PHOTO: Stomp "My MP, Mr Murali Pillai, had even talked to TPTC’s chairman Mr Melvin Yong on this matter, but still after months, the consultant replied back stating it's wear and tear, and TPTC is not to be blamed." In the letter from FormTeam Consultancy dated June 15 shared with Stomp by Omar, the loss adjusters said: "As estate manager, TPTC has fulfilled its duty with due diligence on rectification upon activation while it is not reasonable to expect TPTC to arrest all wear and tear issues which developed over time. "Therefore, while we empathise with your predicament, we must state that TPTC has not been negligent in any way under the circumstances, and hence are not legally liable for this incident. Read Also 30 minutes to extricate trapped man: Motorcyclist crashes into rear windshield of taxi in Bukit Batok "We, therefore, have our Principal’s instructions to repudiate all liability whatsoever and on behalf of whomsoever is concerned for this incident." The Stomp contributor said that the carpark is currently under maintenance. In response to a Stomp query, TPTC said: "Mr Omar contacted the town council in May regarding this matter. "The town council then referred the case to our insurers and our insurers investigated and found that the town council was not legally liable for the damage and loss. "Mr Omar then requested for us to appeal to our insurers on his behalf. We appealed to our insurers and the insurers came back with the same finding that the town council is not liable. "Mr Omar has since informed us that he will be seeking mediation with the public liability insurer under FIDReC (Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre) and has requested for the name of our insurer, which we have provided to him." This article was first published in Stomp. Permission required for reproduction.

Does car rental company insure for such accident? Translate: Army boy crash a rented car, the rental company took them back to their office after the accident and demand them to agree to compensate $67K before releasing them.

http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssFinanci...UST585520090722 HONG KONG, July 22 (Reuters) - Hong Kong's securities watchdog said on Wednesday that 16 banks had agreed to pay about HK$6.3 billion ($813 million) to compensate eligible investors who lost money on structured products or minibonds offered by collapsed U.S. bank Lehman Brothers. "The agreement that we have reached today will enable the vast majority of investors who hold minibonds to receive a substantial return of their capital," said Securities and Futures Commission Chairman Martin Wheatley. "The total amount that they'll receive will be equal to or greater than what they could otherwise recover at current market values," he told reporters following an SFC meeting with the banks. More than 30,000 Hong Kong residents ploughed nearly $2.5 billion into the derivative products which failed as Lehman Brothers collapsed last September. If the agreement is accepted by investors, "the vast majority of them will be able to get back 70 percent or more of their original investments," Financial Secretary John Tsang said in a statement following the SFC announcement. The agreement will put an end to more than 10 months of distress for investors, and will also enable the banks to resume their normal operation, Tsang added. Many of the investors blamed the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) for allowing local banks to sell the products without making investors aware they were risky products. They took to the streets, staging a number of protests in the past year and prompting a government inquiry. The HKMA and the Securities and Futures Commission have since made separate recommendations on how to better protect investors. They include forcing banks to separate their deposit-taking and retail investment businesses. Minibond distributors Sun Hung Kai Financial (0086.HK) and KGI Asia earlier this year agreed to compensate investors in full. Investors in Singapore and Indonesia also lost money on the products. Singapore investors have only been compensated for about a third of their investments. (US$1 = HK$7.75) (Reporting by Nerilyn Tenorio, Donny Kwok and Susan Fenton , Editing by Tomasz Janowski)

Researching off the net, one of the benefit of using nitrogen in tyres (compared to normal air) is that nitrogen expands less thus lower/cooler running temperature. As such, from safety standpoint, is there a need to factor in compensation to the factory recommended pressure? If so, how much to compensate? Example, factory recommended pressure 220. Normal air - cold = 220, hot = 290 (example) Nitrogen - cold = 220, hot = 270 (example) <- since nitrogen expands less Comments please.

I just changed my tyres and noticed the above problem. The stirring wheel will also tilt a little to the left if I let go my hands. Is this a alignment problem?