Search the Community

but "The Straits Time reports motor insurance premiums are expected to remain at current rates as the segment announced high profits yesterday." After posting five years of losses, vehicle insurers posted an underwriting profit of $50.4 million in 2012 - a 135.1 percent increase from 2011. Average premium collections also saw a small 0.5 percent increase last year of $1,280 - announced the General Insurance Association (GIA) at its annual briefing. The President of GIA, Derek Teo, told The Straits Times, average premiums should remain constant as long as there is underwriting profit. He also credited the Motor Claims Framework which combats deceitful and inflated claims for the continued profit. Mr Teo estimates 20 percent of the $700 million in motor claims incurred last year to be fraudulent or inflated. The Motor Claims Framework was set up in 2008, and calls for all motorists to inform insurers of accidents within 24 hours. This makes it easier for insurers to investigate accidents and resolve disputes, cites Mr Teo. Mr Teo also credited the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre, which handles non-injury claims of up to $3,000 to help address inflated claims. Several critical issues face motor insurers, one being the rising number of accidents involving foreign-registered vehicle, from 5,286 reports two years ago to 5,537 reports last year. The large influx of foreign registered vehicles is attributed to the opening of Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa integrated resorts. The increasing number of injury claims also remains a concern, with 19,310 motor injuries reported last year, a 19.4 percent increase from 2008. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- When they earn money they don't raise your premiums. When they don't make a profit, they raise your premiums. So when would they actually lower your premiums???

Now he also chup motor insurance liao? Anyway a good reminder article nonetheless Just doubt the relevant folks would listen... From ST Forum: http://www.straitstimes.com/premium/forum-...claims-20121113 Motor insurers should tackle root causes of inflated claims Published on Nov 13, 2012 ACCORDING to the General Insurance Association of Singapore, regulations introduced in May last year require motorists making property damage claims to give other motorists or their insurers the opportunity to inspect the damage to the vehicles before repairs are undertaken ("Pre-repair inspection rule for accident vehicles"; last Friday). The association should state the percentage of third-party claims that follow this regulation. Anecdotal evidence indicates that payments for third-party damages continue to be high, contributing to hefty motor insurance premiums. Also, are a significant proportion of these claims made through lawyers, and do their fees add to the cost of the claims? Perhaps the insurer paying the claim should also be given the opportunity to settle it without the need to incur legal fees. The requirement to report directly to the paying insurer should be made mandatory by law, rather than being a non-binding regulation by the insurance industry. This will be more effective in addressing the exorbitant cost of third-party claims. In my consulting work in the region, I know that the cost of motor repairs in Singapore is several times that in neighbouring countries. While this can be partly explained by the higher cost of doing business here, the scale of the difference indicates that there are other contributing factors. The motor insurance industry should address the root causes of inflated claims and bring relief to consumers, who now continue to suffer increases in premiums. Tan Kin Lian President Financial Services Consumer Association

From ST Forum: http://www.straitstimes.com/archive/saturd...al-fix-20120929 Don't let insurers leave car owners in renewal fix Published on Sep 29, 2012 MY FAMILY car has been insured for more than 10 years without any claim, and had accumulated a no-claim discount of 50 per cent. Recently, the car got into an accident while being driven by my daughter. Although she is a young driver, she has three years of driving experience. I had to pay an excess of $3,200 for the claim, including the excess for a young driver, and lost the no-claim discount. My insurance policy is due to expire soon, but NTUC Income has refused to renew it on account of the claim, explaining its decision as "market practice". I was told to find another insurer. I tried to do so but was rejected or slapped with unfair and unrealistically excessive renewal fees because of the claim. It is compulsory for a car to be insured before it can be driven on the road. NTUC Income should know that accidents can happen unexpectedly and that they cannot be avoided. That is why insurance is necessary. By rejecting my renewal, how does it expect me to find insurance elsewhere? In my case, I have already paid a large amount of excess and lost my no-claim discount. Are these not enough? The Monetary Authority of Singapore should look into market practices that deprive motorists of compulsory motor coverage. Tan Yau Cher

Apparently the insurer don't want to pay since it is a "collision" and not an "accident" If you put aside the anti-tiong sentiment for a while, what do you think of insurer's actions? If they get their way, will it set a unhealthy precedence for future accidents? Or maybe they know the real reason why Ma Chi cheong the red light but cannot say.

M'sian insurers not liable A NEW High Court ruling here may create problems for car owners on both sides of the Causeway. The court has held that insurers of Malaysian- registered vehicles involved in accidents in Singapore cannot be forced to pay up. Currently, insurers settle claims based on the contracts signed with the vehicle owners. But this new ruling could bring such arrangements into review. Justice Kan Ting Chiu ruled in a judgment earlier this week that the relevant Singapore law for third-party risks and claims applies only to insurers of Singapore-registered vehicles for collisions on roads here. Similarly, a road accident victim who seeks damages in a Malaysian court for an accident caused by a Malaysian vehicle in Singapore will also not be able to sue the Malaysian insurer in a Malaysian court for the same reasons. This means that accident victims can pursue the claim against only the offending motorist, and not against the latter's insurer. But insurers and lawyers The Straits Times spoke to said that while the judge had made clear the position in law, in practice, insurers are still obliged to honour such claims based on the contracts signed with their clients. Senior lawyer Niru Pillai, who represents several insurers on both sides of the Causeway, said the contract signed between the insurer and the insured obliges the insurer to pay up, and it is sacrosanct. 'The judgment does not accord with the practical realities on the ground. The fact of the matter is, insurers do not walk away from their contractual liabilities.' In the case for which the judgment was delivered, Malaysian motorcyclist Lee Choon Keng, 30, had serious leg injuries after a collision with a Malaysian-registered motor trailer and a Singapore car. The accident occurred on Jan 13, 2006, along the Ayer Rajah Expressway. Mr Lee subsequently sued the drivers of both vehicles.

A couple of mths ago, my friend was involved in a freak accident in the carpark where this aunty reversed wifout signal and wifout chking blindspot and hit her ride. But this aunty decided she was not at fault (said my friend followed her too closely) and decided to claim insurance, so my friend went ahead to repair her ride in her preferred workshop and claim 3rd party (the repair cost was abt $1500). Abt 1-2 mths later, AIG sent my friend a letter that the other party is claiming 3rd party insurance as well and asked her for details. So my friend approached the workshop and they replied on her behalf. After another 1mth now, a lawyer for AIG sent my friend another letter that she needa go to their office to tell them more abt the accident. Do u guys have the same experience claiming 3rd party insurance? I dun rem having to go thru so much hassle claiming 3rd party or other ppl claiming 3rd party on me, in my previous insurance. Thought all these shd be transparent to us? Is this some kinda new SOPs? Or is AIG just been kiasi?

AUTO INSURANCE INDUSTRY Investments pay off So why raise premiums? YOU may have noticed that auto insurance premiums have gone up. By Larry Haverkamp (Doc Money) [email protected] 24 June 2008 YOU may have noticed that auto insurance premiums have gone up. The industry said it suffered underwriting losses last year so insurers had no choice but to increase premiums. What they didn't say is that when you consider the money they made from investing our premiums, they made profits and not losses. I'll tell you how. The General Insurance Association (GIA) represents the auto insurance companies. Its President, Derek Teo, said at a press briefing: 'For every dollar in premiums that we collected in the last two years, we paid out $1.20 in claims and other expenses. The current loss situation is not sustainable.' At the GIA annual meeting on March 26, he told auto insurers they must 'collectively address the ... premium inadequacy to turn around the results soon.....' If that was a call to raise premiums, it succeeded. Auto insurers increased premiums by up to 30 per cent. The average was just over 8 per cent as of March 31, exceeding the rate of inflation. Industry sources tell me it has gone higher since then. The press picked up the banner. On March 27, Straits Times reported, '...motor insurance losses which hit a 5-year high of $103.2 million last year'. The same day, Business Times said: 'Last year, insurers reported a loss of $103.2m of motor insurance....' To the casual reader, it looks like auto insurers lost $103.2m. That is wrong. They actually made money. It's because the $103.2m in losses are from one part of the business, the underwriting part. It is money the insurer makes if you don't have a car accident. Then it doesn't have to pay any claims and can keep your premiums. That becomes its underwriting profit. The second part of the business is investing your premiums. It is even more important since it earns more money. INVESTING MORE PROFITABLE That part of the business has been so profitable that it more than offsets the losses from underwriting. Take the top 10 auto insurers. Annual returns show they account for 85 per cent of the business, and in 2007 earned a whopping $143.5m from investments. It more than offset the $104.5m in underwriting losses. On net, they earned $39m in profits. Suppose we look at all 35 auto insurers. It shows the same picture: $183m in investment income which more than offset underwriting losses of $129m. The difference is net profits of $54m. The highly publicised losses are only one part of their business. Looking at the entire picture shows auto insurers made hefty profits in 2007. It was almost the same in 2006. The top 10 auto insurers earned profits of $137m. But only $5m of it came from underwriting while $132m came from investments. It is the nature of the business. Investments produce more profits for auto insurers than underwriting.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/sin.../313374/1/.html Singapore motor insurers report 300% rise in Q3 losses By Loh Kim Chin, Channel NewsAsia | Posted: 23 November 2007 2251 hrs Photos 1 of 1 SINGAPORE : Losses in motor insurance are hurting profits in the general insurance market. According to the General Insurance Association of Singapore, or GIA, gross insurance premiums rose 3.7 percent in the third quarter of this year to S$572 million compared to the same period a year ago. But the motor account - the largest single class of general insurance business in Singapore - continued to see losses. The loss came in at S$40 million - the largest ever quarterly loss for motor insurers in Singapore. The GIA attributed the losses to rising claims, high acquisition costs and underpricing due to fierce competition. It warns that for the whole year, the loss on the motor account would top the S$100 million mark. - CNA/ch