Monday, Apr 11, 2011 at 22:24
Sorry Josh but your wrong. They are only obligated to pay a claim if it meets the contract they have with the insured person. There are many examples where people are not appropriatly insured and therefore not covered. The simple fact is that the only person who you have right to claim against is the person at fault not their insurer. The insurer simply pays the claim on their behalf but only in accordance with the contract they have with the insured. If the contract wording makes it clear that the "accident" is not covered then you have to deal with the person directly or your own insurer.
Why the reluctance to claim on your own insurance. Less hassel and no down side. They will recover the money from the other insurer anyway or the person at fault directly. All you are doing is causing yourself hassel. Because it was not your fault there should be no excess or impact on the no claim bonus
The amount of mis
information in relation to insurance is amazing. Most poeple spend more time reading the newpaper than the document that insures (usually) the most valuable things they own, the house and car. In fact I bet most people don't even read the PDS when they receive the policy in the mail. They just think I've paid my policy they should cover everthing.
You need to remember that insurance is like any other produce or service you buy. You pay for what you get. Some insurers are cheaper because they assume less risk. A good example is flood cover for homes. It amazed me how many people after the floods found out that they were not covered for flood then said I didn't know so its the insurer fault. Did they read the policy. In most cases no. It's like going to the car dealer, buying an Excel and then say I though we were taking about the BMW next to it so I expect to get a BMW even though I only paid $12999 for it.
It easy to bash up on insurers but they in most cases have a very good reason for not paying a claim. Like any system that involved people there are mistakes made but 99.99% of valid claims are paid without hassel.
I work for an insurer and we look for reasons to pay valid claims. No insurer I have worked for has a policy, offical or unoffical, to seek out fine print to reject claims. In most cases it costs more to fight a claim than to pay it.
Finally, the term fine print bugs me. it implies that it is somehow hidden to trick people. If people would just read the documentation they receive they would know what is covered and what is not.
I'm not suggesting improvements can't be made. No one can say that about any product or service but to continually blame insurers for all the wrongs people suffer just bugs me..
By the way Josh not all the above is directed at you so please don't take offence.
FollowupID:
723547