[saket77]

Originally Posted by fine69

Why such emphasis on hefty premium. Someone pays premium for life insurance but he dies of a disease not covered in insurance. -------

If a person who is insured, contracts any disease which is not covered by his life insurer AFTER he takes the policy, the insurance company is liable to pay.

Emphasis on hefty premium because the way you want to portray insurance companies is like they are doing a favor by paying a part for damages, like charity. Plus I pay more as I lose NCB too. There is already a thread running parallel where a Fabia which was hit underneath lost its engine. The insurance company must pay for the damage in my opinion, more so, since according to your logic, no third party was involved. That unfortunately has not happened as of yet.

And moreover, all of us are not showered with the luxury of having multiple vehicles and they mean our bread and butter. Most of us cannot afford to keep our cars in service centers for months. For instance, I certainly cannot. I have a full time job and a company policy which does not pay me if I don't turn up for work on a day. I claimed my first party insurance once a D'zire hit my driver's door and got it back after 3 days with about Rs. 1100/- bill apart from insurance. I did not have time and money to register an FIR and run for a report from their side and file a case for insurance. Thanks but no thanks. There are a lot of instances of fake 3rd party claims and I am quite comfortable not waiting for my dates in court. Call it convenience, yes - that's the system's fault, not mine. If I go and claim a third party insurance, I need to pay to file an FIR, pay bribes for case diaries, pay the lawyer - all this may add up to the cost of repair itself. I don't have surplus money to finance these stuff and especially bribes which will come into picture anyway at some point of time in the case. Tell me how would you can manage this without bribe. And lastly, why should anything that is convenient be always wrong?

[fighterace]

Originally Posted by callvvijay

...

Certain questions:
1. Primarily and most importantly - Have I taken the right approach in dealing this?

2. Is there anything that I should take care of w.r.t. claims from insurance, claims from him etc.

...!

It was very civil on the part of the person responsible to own up and agree to pay. Such behaviour is unheard of in Delhi. I'd suggest that you recover the parts not covered under insuarance from him, and maybe this years NCB amount. After all that is why we have insurance for. As his transfer formalities haven't been completed, escalation may result him in paying out of his pocket. The resulting loss of goodwill can't be measured in terms of money.

[Visaster]

I went through the same problem few years back. A neighbor banged into my car parked inside the apartment, damaging the front and back including the front wheel.
Though he paid for the paint damages (about 6K) and the service guys managed to fix everything well, the car never felt the same, I lost confidence in taking high speed curves, the front wheel kinda wobbled on taking a full turn even on slowest speed.
So when you are at it make sure you change everything than repairing it.

Don't go by words from your neighbor that he will pay. Take a written agreement from him. Cause the bill is going to be high and once he knows that you have used the insurance he has no need to pay you the whole amount. He has no need to compensate for your no claim bonus. Mostly once the heat dies down the person who accepts to pay refuses and says its not affordable by him, and he would have got it done somewhere else cheaper and so on. I have heard to all kinds of stories.
In Chennai I have had 6 episodes and every time, once the work is done, whoever agreed to pay starts renegotiating.

I am not sure how you are going to get the money out of him. I am sure if your other neighbor was not around he would have not bothered owning up to the accident.

All the best. I always am skeptical of driving a car which has got a hit on its wheels. It never drives the same.

[fine69]

Originally Posted by saket77

If a person who is insured, contracts any disease which is not covered by his life insurer AFTER he takes the policy, the insurance company is liable to pay.

My dear sir I know that which is why I emphasized that the disease diagnosis is hidden from the insurance firm. It was a hypothetical example to impress upon the fact that hiding facts sure seem practical but are they right? Why wouldn't people simply own up the fact that what they did was wrong but since it was convenient/practical they did it.

But if we say that it isn't wrong then what's the criteria to label other acts as wrong and not practical, that is what my point is for the tenth time please.

Originally Posted by saket77

Emphasis on hefty premium because the way you want to portray insurance companies is like they are doing a favor by paying a part for damages, like charity.

Again you've missed the point. I'm not saying anybody is doing anybody a favour. But is it right to have insurance company 'A' pay for what should go out of the pocket of insurance company 'B'. Lengthy process notwithstanding, is it right or not is the argument.

Originally Posted by saket77

Plus I pay more as I lose NCB too.

I hope nobody forced you to get insurance. The terms are subject to your acceptance. You my dear sir are also not doing anybody a favour by paying more if you lose NCB, that's the terms of the contract, take it or leave it.

Originally Posted by saket77

There is already a thread running parallel where a Fabia which was hit underneath lost its engine. The insurance company must pay for the damage in my opinion, more so, since according to your logic, no third party was involved. That unfortunately has not happened as of yet.

And your point is? Did I say insurance companies always act in the favour of the consumer? Did I advocate the practices of the insurance companies anytime?

Originally Posted by saket77

Call it convenience, yes - that's the system's fault, not mine. If I go and claim a third party insurance, I need to pay to file an FIR, pay bribes for case diaries, pay the lawyer - all this may add up to the cost of repair itself. I don't have surplus money to finance these stuff and especially bribes which will come into picture anyway at some point of time in the case. Tell me how would you can manage this without bribe. And lastly, why should anything that is convenient be always wrong?

Now we're talking. Isn't it the system's fault that traffic police personnel are not deployed on notorious unmanned intersections? It would be very convenient for people to get in the wrong lane facing opposite traffic for a quick way out. In fact people do it all the time, why is that disliked by our fellow members?

Oh, because it causes a 2 to 5 to 15 minute inconvenience to others. Then what about the time, effort and resources spent by the insurance company in dealing with the OP's car when they could've dealt with the next in line case faster?

Somebody else who has a genuine case might have been dealt with faster. Its obviously inconvenient to him but since he doesn't see all this happening he doesn't have a choice but to wait.

My point is that when all of us (including me) opt for the more practical solution then why the double standards and moral/ethical policing when similar other instances are reported on this forum.

OP's post begins with a big fat lie and nobody here can deny that. But saying that hiding facts is practical but bribing your way out of a situation where you weren't at fault isn't, how so? I'm not trying to pin-point the OP or you or anybody else but only those bhpians who start talking of the "right thing to be done" when we all know that we've been there done that too.

[saket77]

Someone pays premium for life insurance but he dies of a disease not covered in insurance. His family hides the fact from the insurer because its obviously more practical to get the insurance money in 8 digits then divulge all details and not get anything.

My dear sir I know that which is why I emphasized that the disease diagnosis is hidden from the insurance firm. It was a hypothetical example to impress upon the fact that hiding facts sure seem practical but are they right? Why wouldn't people simply own up the fact that what they did was wrong but since it was convenient/practical they did it.

Honestly, I did not understand a thing here. If the diagnosis is before taking the policy; no coverage. Post policy; sure thing insurer will need to pay.

Anyways, analogies aside, please post the link to the incident which is the background of your posts. I am sure something have pestered you in past on the forum and you are generalizing people and incidents, both. And if you generalize everything, there is no point discussing individual cases.

Regards.

[fine69]

Originally Posted by saket77

Honestly, I did not understand a thing here. If the diagnosis is before taking the policy; no coverage. Post policy; sure thing insurer will need to pay.

There are policies for people above a certain age where in certain medical conditions aren't covered. Suppose a person dies from a combination of disease A and B, out of which B isn't covered. I be "practical" about it and hide certain details from the insurer by whatever means I can and ultimately get the money. Was it practical? Sure it was, even if I use the money on myself or donate it to charity. I mean it HAS to be practical because someone paid a hefty premium for so many years.

Originally Posted by saket77

I am sure something have pestered you in past on the forum and you are generalizing people and incidents, both. And if you generalize everything, there is no point discussing individual cases.

You would be surprised but I haven't had any such experience. However, I've read a couple of them which is why my argument in the first place. Or is it that you are sure again that no such incident has happened?
I think we can stop this discussion here because my questions have been unanswered so I know this discussion isn't going anywhere.

[saket77]

Originally Posted by fine69

I think we can stop this discussion here because my questions have been unanswered so I know this discussion isn't going anywhere.

Yes, we are going no where with respect to this. Let's keep the thread uncluttered and wait for response from the OP regarding the estimates of repair and post job analysis of his car

Regards.

[pamiboy]

Originally Posted by Visaster

I went through the same problem few years back. A neighbor banged into my car parked inside the apartment, damaging the front and back including the front wheel.
Though he paid for the paint damages (about 6K) and the service guys managed to fix everything well, the car never felt the same, I lost confidence in taking high speed curves, the front wheel kinda wobbled on taking a full turn even on slowest speed.
So when you are at it make sure you change everything than repairing it.
Don't go by words from your neighbor that he will pay. Take a written agreement from him. Cause the bill is going to be high and once he knows that you have used the insurance he has no need to pay you the whole amount. He has no need to compensate for your no claim bonus. Mostly once the heat dies down the person who accepts to pay refuses and says its not affordable by him, and he would have got it done somewhere else cheaper and so on. I have heard to all kinds of stories.
In Chennai I have had 6 episodes and every time, once the work is done, whoever agreed to pay starts renegotiating.
I am not sure how you are going to get the money out of him. I am sure if your other neighbor was not around he would have not bothered owning up to the accident.
All the best. I always am skeptical of driving a car which has got a hit on its wheels. It never drives the same.

My friend had a similar incident. Parked car at home was hit by a recently moved in neighbor. He "profusely apologized and agreed to bear all the costs" and requested not to make a police report saying "as good neighbours we will sort it amongst ourselves". The car was repaired at dealer and when the final bill came the good neighbor said "That's too much. Why didn't you go to a cheaper garage" ?
To cut the story short, in the end my friend threatened to involve the police and the neighbor denied the entire thing ever happened. (His car has already been repaired and therefore no evidence of any crash, apart from the victim's word of mouth).
Moral of the story, always file an FIR with police immediately, regardless of whose fault it is or who is paying for the repair. You need not involve the insurance every time you file a police report. You can still be on good terms with the neighbor even after filing an FIR .

I appreciate the good relations the OP and his neighbor have, but calling the OP's insurance may not be the best move. His subsequent insurance premiums will be higher for the next five years or so. Why didn't he call the neighbor's insurance? The rise in the neighbour's premium will be much less than the amount of money he will have to fork out for the repairs. It will be interesting to see how this thread plays out when the times comes to pay the bill.

[phamilyman]

Originally Posted by pamiboy

My friend had a similar incident. Parked car at home was hit by a recently moved in neighbor. He "profusely apologized and agreed to bear all the costs" and requested not to make a police report saying "as good neighbours we will sort it amongst ourselves". The car was repaired at dealer and when the final bill came the good neighbor said "That's too much. Why didn't you go to a cheaper garage" ?

. It will be interesting to see how this thread plays out when the times comes to pay the bill.

THAT was exactly my worry. Hope the OP has taken pictures.

Either do a trustworthy FNG level repair if they are paying (and you're sure structural integrity isnt impacted), or if insurance pays, go the M.A.S.S way.

[saket77]

Vijay, take the other guy with you when you go to MASS to get a quote for the repair of your car. That way he knows what to expect when comes the final bill to foot by him apart from the insurance cover.

[Visaster]

Hope this ends well, I have a bad feeling about it. As it is enough we cough up for our own mistake, its pains taking when we have to pay for others mistake. In present times no matter whose fault the owner/insurance has to take the burden, the other party can easily walk away.
Last year my swift was tail ended by a truck when i was parked at a signal with red light on. After all the time wasted, fighting, screaming, taking the truck to the police station, all I got was a small note from the cops. The truck was let off with no damages, no fine, no compensation, no nothing.
That day I realized accidents is our own burden to carry no matter whose fault, so I don't waste time even getting down from the car anymore if anyone hits me. I foot the bill with that heavy heart. That is Chennai road habits

[ashis89]

Originally Posted by Visaster

Last year my swift was tail ended by a truck when i was parked at a signal with red light on. After all the time wasted, fighting, screaming, taking the truck to the police station, all I got was a small note from the cops. The truck was let off with no damages, no fine, no compensation, no nothing.
That day I realized accidents is our own burden to carry no matter whose fault,

I can relate to your story. A couple of years back, my cousin was waiting in his 2 month old Alto behind a 407 over loaded with construction iron rods at a red signal. His car was a good 6-7 foot behind the nearest rod protruding from the truck. As the signal turned green, the truck couldn't move on, stalled and started rolling back. His second attempt to move on also failed and finally the rods pierced the alto right at the centre of the windscreen and also left a deep gash on the roof. All this while, my cousin was blaring the horn and trying to reverse but due to a car right at his tail, he couldn't. Traffic police came and tried to "settle the claim" at Rs.500 which the driver was willing to pay. But when my cousin said his damages were going to cost lot more, the driver refused and asked to be taken to the nearest PS. There, the new claim settlement was Rs.1000. My cousin refused and said he would evaluate the car and come back with the estimate to which the Police agreed. The next morning when he went to the PS, the driver was gone and the Police said the case was closed as my cousin didn't agree to the compensation offered. Finally he had to shell out Rs 6.5k from his pocket even after claiming insurance.

[proton]

Quote
New strategy by traffic police.

To resolve situations created by traffic accidents, traffic police are now resorting to forced compromises.

I was squeezed by a bus into a neighboring lane at Trinity circle where the so called lane discipline is being implemented, the chaos already reported here on this thread. The next car's rear bumper hooked on to my front bumper and caused damages.

We took both the vehicles to the police station where I asked that the claims be made through my insurance vendor.

Blank refusal! We were asked to settle through cash. Failing which both the vehicles would be impounded to check if the vehicles were responsible for the accident, when it was clearly the fault of the bad implementation of the lane discipline exercise. For everybody's information, lane change must be made well in advance. For the past two weeks, those who have made timely lane changes find that midway the lane has been barricaded for pothole repair! We are forced to suspend lane discipline, change to next lane, and then switch back after the pothole!

When confronted, the police held that I should have gone on airport road, taken a u turn, returned to same spot, and then attempted the lane change. Several friends have reported their cars being impounded, and spending thousands to get their vehicles out of the fault finding witch hunt by the police.

Anyhow, it seems pointless to take comprehensive insurance, as the police will just force one to settle out of court. Third party to be taken just for compliance.

http://www.team-bhp.com/forum/street...ml#post2831982

This is a previous post.

My present strategy is to drive a basic car, buy bumper to bumper insurance and recover costs this way. Premiums and NCB loss is factored into owning and operating costs of the vehicle. Somewhere down the line, insurance companies will try to regain losses through loss of third party recovery benefits.

They are already curbing the costs hospitals charge for medical procedures. No more blank cheques for heart surgery. Everything is estimated by specialists and charges enforced on member hospitals.

[Visaster]

Originally Posted by proton

Quote

To resolve situations created by traffic accidents, traffic police are now resorting to forced compromises.


Blank refusal! We were asked to settle through cash.

They are already curbing the costs hospitals charge for medical procedures.

A little off topic, but I don't understand why you went to the cops, vehicle insurance companies don't even care how the accident happen, they are ready to pay for damages.
Health insurance is a different ball game all together.

[hserus]

Originally Posted by Visaster

A little off topic, but I don't understand why you went to the cops, vehicle insurance companies don't even care how the accident happen, they are ready to pay for damages.
Health insurance is a different ball game all together.

Ever heard of third party insurance? Clauses like this.

This motor insurance does not cover you and your motor vehicle. It covers your legal liability for the damage you caused to a third party only - bodily injury, death and damage to third party property - while using your vehicle.