Claim Stories

The 3^rd party claim was approved under the public liability coverage.

Items (b) and (c) were approved as impact damages under the fire policy.

However, items (d) and (e) were not payable since both were considered enhancements or improvements.

a) The cause of an incident is the key factor in determining claim liability under the relevant section or type of policy.

b) The purpose of insurance is to restore property damages to their original state before the loss.

c) An enhancement or improvement will not be paid or claimable.

d) An insurance agent must be able to apply to the appropriate policy sections to ensure claim approval and protect the insured’s interests.

The appeal was successful, and the claim has been approved.

1. A professional agent must possess knowledge of all types of provisions in an insurance policy.

2. Fire policy typically covers resulting damages to building fixtures and fittings caused by a bursting water pipe.

3. It is the Management’s duty and responsibility to maintain the piping, as it is considered common property.

4. Piping may burst or overflow due to negligence on the part of Management.

5. Therefore, any resulting damage to personal contents may be claimed under the public liability policy.

6. The JMB fire policy primarily covers the building’s structure and common property. Individual unit owners are encouraged to obtain their own homeowner’s or household insurance for adequate protection.

The claim was rejected based on the following findings:

a. No actual ignition or fire occurred

b. The cable melted due to overheating

c. Lack of maintenance due to loose connection

d. Policy perils only cover damages caused by fire.

a. The fire policy covers damages caused by fire occurrences. Flashovers or short circuits that do not result in a fire are not within the perils coverage.

b. Understanding the details of policy coverage is crucial. In this case, there was no fire or ignition; only a sudden flashover occurred due to overheating.

c. However, if there is damage to the machine due to a short circuit or flashover, the claim may be considered under the machinery breakdown policy.

The fall was caused by a hole in the road during construction. The contractor’s negligence was confirmed. As a result, this incident is covered under the Contractual All Risk (CAR) policy.

The claim approved was RM11K versa the total claim submission of RM72K++.

The breakdown: –

1. Medical Cost – RM19K++

(Already paid under his medical insurance)

2. General damage – RM38K++

(Approved amount is RM11K based on the Revised Compendium of Personal Injury Awards)

3. Property damage – RM15K++

(This amount is below the policy excess of RM20K)

a. Third parties have the right to submit claims for any amount;

b. However, the “larger claims amount” may result in longer the verification and investigation processes, potentially delaying the claim outcome.

c. The principle of insurance is to compensate for losses, not to allow for profit from claims.

d. In view of the above, double claims are not permitted as the medical expenses have already been paid by his/her medical insurance.

e. The fair compensation value on the General Claim is based on the Revised Compendium of Personal Injury Awards.

The full claim amount of RM75K was approved.

Additionally, the hotel was able to recover the loss of revenue totaling RM35K during the business closure, under the Fire Consequential Loss policy.

The Fire Consequential Loss Insurance:-

1. This coverage is crucial, especially during major fire disasters.

2. The compensation of loss is based on the estimated future income, measured according to your business trend (based on the last few months or seasonality).

3. It can cover business loss from a few days to a few years.

4. This insurance ensures your company’s sustainability even in the event of major fire damage and losses.

Claim approved was RM243K++.

Items not payable were: –

• Dismantle and reinstall light fittings,
• Dismantle & installation of plaster ceiling; and
• Painting works and disposal of rubbish.

a) This is cable installation contract works insured under the project insurance.

b) The Contractors All Risks (CAR) coverage is based on the contract scope of works and all items stated in the bill of quantities (BQ).

c) Therefore, the replacement of cable and related electrical works is payable except for those items that do not form part of the original contract.

d) However, for those not payable items might be claimable under the other renovation contractor policy at the same site, if any.

Damages to the roof ceiling were approved, but the claim for the 3^rd party vehicle damage was rejected, reasons:-

a) Windstorm damages for the roof ceiling are covered under the Fire policy and are payable.

b) It is an exclusion on Act of God under the Public Liability coverage; therefore, the 3^rd party vehicle claim is not payable

a) The insurance policy is a contract, all claims under the scope of coverage will be payable except for the exclusions.

b) The root cause of an incident is the key factor determining whether it falls under the policy coverage.

c) There is no proof of negligence or wrongdoing of the policyholder, as windstorm is an Act of God.

d) For any claim from a 3^rd party, it is important for the policyholder NOT to promise and commit upfront that the claim is payable.

e) The vehicle owner shall claim under his/her motor insurance policy if there is an add-on peril coverage.

The roof structure collapsed due to a major defective design & poor workmanship.

The claim was rejected for the following reasons:-

A) The steel roof design did not comply with the specifications and requirements stipulated in the Uniform Building by Law ( a globally adopted practice including Malaysia under statutory regulations).

B) It indicated clearly that the insured failed to take reasonable precautions and to comply with statutory requirements, as stipulated under the General Policy Condition 3 – Duty of Care.

C) Moreover, the structural design is not under the insured’s scope of work. Therefore, the existing policy did not extend to cover the Designer’s risk.

A) The root cause of the incident is the key factor in determining whether the claim is payable or vice versa.

B) The Contractor All Risks (CAR) policy coverage is always based on the scope of works as stated in the Letter of Award/ Contract.

C) It is important for a contractor to know their responsibilities and duties, and all potential exposure risks when looking for insurance coverage. This is to ensure the adequacy of policy coverage in all areas.

D) Our advice as the Insurance Agent, the insured could take further action against the parties involved in this project: –

1. The Architect/Consultant – responsible for the drawing and design of the structure. May claim under their Professional Indemnity (PI) Insurance Policy.
2. The Contractor/Sub-contractors – responsible for constructing the extension on poor workmanship.

The claim approved was RM212k++

Goods not damaged and some items not payable amounted to RM491k ++

This claim process takes almost 8 months period. The larger the amount of claim:-

     1. The longer the time needed for verification by the adjuster and insurer.

     2. Engagement of independent professionals such as forensic experts on the actual damages.

     3. Involved more authorized persons at higher levels to approve the claims.

Therefore, it is NOT ADVISABLE to overstate the amount claim which may cause unnecessary delay.

The risks improvement:

      1. Important to store expensive items on rack or on  pallet (easy to move and rescue the item)

      2. Important to periodically conduct maintenance of the drainage system in and around the risk premises; and

      3. Installed submersible pumps to pump out the water should water reach certain level.

The claim was rejected initially based on the exclusion clause “Circumcision”

However, the claim was approved and payable after the servicing agent’s appeal.

• It is important to identify the reason or need for a medical treatment or procedure.
• The medical policy covers any treatment or procedures carried out due to medical grounds.
• In this case, even the term “circumcision” is excluded, but the procedure was done due to a medical condition and recommended by the specialist.
• The claim was approved since circumcision is needed to arrest the infection.
• A responsible and knowledgeable insurance service agent will play a critical role when a claim arises.

The claim was approved with the initial offer of RM886.80 but subsequently revised to RM3,060.40 after appeal.

The Agent’s findings:-

1. The calculation of the “Depreciation Deduction” is not correct;
2. The depreciation should be based on when the neighbor’s wall was completed in 2012, 11 years;
3. And not when the insured condo was completed in 1987, 37 years ago.
4. This resulted in lower compensation value due to the “higher” depreciation deduction.

The effort of the agent to further appeal on the insured behalf, and managed to increase the claims compensation by 245% which is a fairer value.

It is the agent’s responsibility and role to always ensure the CORRECTNESS of all FACTS and FAIRNESS compensation for all parties.

The lower court rejected the claim based on the exemption clause that “ vehicles were parked solely at the customer’s own risk.”

But, the court of appeal upheld the decision.

1. The car park operator could not rely on an exemption clause to evade liability.
2. The motorist had paid a fee to park at the facility hence it was the responsibility of the car park operator to take care of the security of the car.

The liability of car park operators under contract law is governed by the Contracts Act 1950.

• It is NOT a valid or strong argument for car park operators to claim that: –

1. 1. They are only responsible for providing parking space;
   2. And, they had taken reasonable precautions;
   3. Relied on the exemption clause to limit their liabilities that “ vehicles parked at your own risks”

• Any claim case against a car park operator must be supported by documentation evidence such as :
  1. Copy of the parking ticket or receipt;
  2. Dashcam footage or pictures or videos;
  3. And the proof of negligence. 

• For protection and to have a piece of mind, it is important for car park operators to have a “Public Liability Insurance Policy.”

• Without insurance, car park operators are solely responsible for paying any damages to a third party, for property damages & body injury.

The claim was rejected because:

1 .  The policy legally covers compensation in respect of bodily injury to or illness of any person.

2.  Based on Oxford English Dictionary, the word “Person” maybe defined as a human as an individual and/or also defined as a human, especially one who is not identified. The injury/illness to a dog is not covered. 

3.  The rat bait is found within the unit owner’s compound, not at a Common Property.

4.  The dog’s poisoning is considered a type of contamination, which is expressly excluded under the policy. (i.e. an exclusion)

1.  The insurance policy is a contract. 

2.  The policy wording interpretation is the key factor to determine whether the claim is within the scope of coverage. 

3.  For liability claims, the Joint Management Body (the insured) is advisable not to admit liability, promise or agree on any quantum of compensation prior to the assessment by the adjuster/insurance company. 

4.  Having a piece of proper advise from a qualified and experienced insurance agent is important. 

The claim was rejected because:

1 .  As the damage happens during the maintenance period, it is out of the Contractor All Risk (CAR) period of coverage.

2.  There was no maintenance work carried out during the time of the damage.

3.  During the Defect Liability Period (DLP), the policy only covers resultant damages due to the contractor’s negligence while carrying out the maintenance work.

1.  The CAR policy coverage is for the entire project construction period until the issuing date of the Certificate of Practical Completion (CPC).

2.  During the Defect Liability Period (DLP), the coverage will be limited. It only covers third-party liability during the maintenance works.

3.  Even though the policy liability is not apparent in this case, this does not exempt the Contractor to escape from any liability in the “Award Contract/Agreement”.

4.  If the damage was due to poor workmanship or defective work during the warranty period, then it is the Developer’s right to seek compensation or legal action as stipulated in the Contract terms & conditions.

The claim was not recoverable, the damages being due to wear & tear. And also the JBM master policy does not extend to cover individual household items.

However, the changing of old tiles is covered but the claim amount, in this case, is within the excess of RM1,000.00.

1.  Wear and tear, is a general exclusion under All Insurance policies.

2.  It is advisable for a unit owner to have an individual policy to cover household items.

Adjuster findings were as follows: –

a) The lift door was functioning properly.

b) The maintenance lift records show no defects detected.

c) The lift was properly maintained and safe to use.

There was no negligence on the part of the insured, as supported by the CCTV footage evidence.

The policy would not respond to the insured’s legal liability.

Therefore, the claim was rejected.

1.  The management office’s duty of care: –

• Regularly service the lift in good condition;
• Keep proper records of the maintenance;
• Take immediate action to rectify any defects.

2.  It is important NOT to admit mistakes or offer settlements upfront if approached for compensation.

3.  Claim submitted must be fair & reasonable and not excessive and ridiculous.

4.  Warning sign and close that section if the lift is under repair/maintenance.

5.  Ensure that the lift area, inside and outside, lights up well.

All claims are payable with accumulation of more than RM100,000 ++

1.  The important of Risk Improvement: –

     a.  To avoid similar incident from occurring;

     b.  To minimize unnecessary inconvenience or disturbance when any of the facility is not functioning.

     c.  To avoid additional work load and stressfulness in carrying out the repair work.

     d.  It helps to upkeep the value of the property.

2.  With risk improvement, it could be helpful and in better position to convince the insurer to renew the policy with the same premium rate and terms.

3.  Otherwise, no insurance company will cover the risk. They may impose additional premium loading and possibly with unfavorable insurable terms.

Adjuster findings was as follows: –

a.  The water tank was old, rusty and sign of crack.

b.  The water tank cover panels were deteriorating due to daily exposure under sun.

c.  Over time the cover panels burst under water pressure.

The root cause of the water tank at the roof top burst was due to wear and tear, hence it falls under the Policy Exclusion Clause. The claim is therefore rejected.

1.  The damage of the water tanks itself was due to wear & tear, and gradual deterioration, therefore it is NOT payable as stated in the Exclusion Clause of the policy.

2.  However, the policy extends to cover for loss or damage to the other part of the property insured caused by bursting or overflowing of water tanks, apparatus and pipes install in or on the building. In this case, there was no losses incurred.

The circumstances below does not met the Policy Criteria’s for the claim to be admitted: –

1.  The cat nor the extended rooftop were not a part of the Management Original Property.

2.  No evidence of negligence or wrong doing from the Management Office.

3.  No incident to indicate the management was negligence in carrying out its duty.

1.  Not all claims are payable.

2.  It’s advisable to fully understanding the Terms & Conditions of Policy plus its exclusion clauses before advising the customer.

3.  Giving false hope to a customer that a claim is payable even before identifying the root cause of the incident is dangerous.

4.  Always advise the customer to submit all claim documents early to expedite claim processing.

5.  Seek proper advice from an experience and a Professional Insurance Agent regarding claim matters.

Initially claim approved was RM22K++ but JOINTREP treatment was excluded, reason being under “experimental stage”.

On appeal and submission of evidence that JOINTREP was approved by Medical Devices Authority (MDA) under MOH via the below website:

  https://mdar.mda.gov.my/frontend/web/index.php?r=carian (where it was stated that the JOINTREP was registered with MDA and it is safe to use).

Finally, the JOINTREP treatment was approved.

1.   Understand the exclusion clauses under the Policy. In this case the exclusion included: –

      i)   Treatment under experimental stage

      ii)  Investigational or research nature

      iii) Preventive or screening nature

2.   To verify refer to MDA’s website for any new treatment whether the treatment is registered and approved.

3.   Knowledgeable and Professional Insurance Agent to act on your behalf is important during claim processing.

Removal and replace of damage metal grill and metal roof was payable, as it is part of the insured property.

However, removal of the fallen tree trunk was not payable, reason “tree is NOT an insured property and hence is not cover under the removal of debris”.

Understand the coverage of the policy as per below: –

   1.  The Insured Items and Properties;

   2.  The Scope of Coverage; and

   3.  The Root Cause of any incident.

In this case: –

   1.  The building is the insured property and not the tree.

   2.  The cause of incident was “windstorm”.

It is advisable to include “falling tree peril” in the policy if property is surrounded by trees. This will extend the coverage include other reasons such as unstable rooting, aging, destroy by white ant and etc.

Initially, it was reported that the wall collapsed due to strong wind and heavy rain.

However, based on the Meteorological Department’s weather report, there was no evidence of violent wind at the time of incident.

The wall collapsed due to soil erosion. The claim was not admissible, hence rejected.

1. The root cause of an incident is the key factor to determine whether the claim is payable.
2. Soil erosion is an exclusion clause under the policy.
3. If the damage was due to heavy windstorm as the originally reported, then the claim will be payable.
4. Seek help from qualify insurance agent for interpretation and better understanding of the policy clauses.

After studying the actual damage and the photos submitted the insurer approved the claim for RM900++ only, for knocking, installing and spray painting works to restore it back to normal.

To replace the entire body lift of the damage item was found to be unreasonable and rejected.

1.  Any claim approved must be seen to be fair and reasonable.

2.  The main principle on insurance is on reimbursement basis: –

• To compensate on the actual damages or losses.
• Only the repair costs to restore the damage items back to its original are allow; and
• Not to make any gain from the situation for all claims.

3.  Don’t panic to admit the mistake and promise to 3^rd party for compensation in advance.

4.  Let the professional adjuster or insurer’s representative to investigate and come out with the outcome.

After several discussions, agent suggested for the following risk improvement: –

1.   To have a 4-inch-high cement barrier and;

2.   With an add-on discharge hole.

This will deter the similar incident from happening again.

As the result, Insurance company agreed to renew the policy without imposing the “Special Excess Clause”.

1.   Water Damage tends to be high frequency and repeatable incident.

2.   All Insurance companies will impose unfavorable conditions for those repeatable claims, if there is NO any risk improvement action being carry out.

3.   In order to continue to enjoy a good premium rate and favorable term & conditions, risk improvement is a MUST.

4.   This will not only be a “Premium Saving” in the long run, and also to ease the day-to-day maintenance operations.

5.   If we do not take care of our own property, then who care? Sooner or later no insurance companies would like to cover the condo.

The policy was liable for the damages but more time was needed to finalize the case, due to the substantial claims amount submitted earlier.

The Claim was approved with the final amount of RM257++, reason for this claim was as follows:-

1. Only essential replacement of damaged parts caused by the water was necessary.
2. in most instances quite a number of parts does not need replacement but only servicing.
3. not all parts were damaged by the water, only replacement parts for the actual damaged were approved.
4. some items quoted were over prized.

1.  Some lift vendors/contractors may offer unnecessary repair works and replacements.

2.  The bigger value of claims will trigger more details of investigation.

3.  The insurer needs longer time to finalize the claims, and it may cause delay.

4.  Claim payment made must be fair and reasonable, as claim were payable to make good those item damaged and not meant to gain or profit from the claim submitted.

Fast approval with full sum claimed of RM80K++ from insurer within two (2) weeks.

The full commitment shown by the serving agent in putting the insured interest first is utmost important.

In this case immediate action and reporting a claim upon receiving a call from the insured on a Saturday morning, even though it was an off day.

Good working relationship with insurer and managed to arrange the Adjuster to visit the incident site immediately, on the same day.

Finally, fast approval with full sum claimed by the insured, all within 2 weeks.

The claim was approved for RM5K++ by the insurer within FOUR (4) working days, one day before the Chinese New Year celebration and without any adjuster being appointed.

It is a normal standard practice by the insurer that adjuster would be appointed if the value of claim is exceeding RM5K.

1. The damaged to the access card system for the barrier gate to function properly must be addressed immediately, if not it would cause a lot of inconveniences to the resident especially when the Chinese New Year festival is around the corner.

2. Yes, claimant allow to submit add on repair bill so long as the damage is under the covered area and it’s genuine. 

3. A Responsible Agent will always act and put the insured right and interest as their top priority.

The claim was rejected at first by the insurer. Reason being the injury sustained during the fall while playing volleyball aggravated the injury at the same location, where the student had met with an injury during a skiing incident in year 2019.

The Policy clearly stated that injury caused by skiing incident falls under the exclusion clause.

An appeal was sent to the insurer to have a further examine of the injury. Adjuster was appointed, an appointment arranged to have the student examine by an Orthopedic Consultant.

The appeal was successful and the claim was approved for RM6K++.

1.  Any reason(s) of rejecting a claim must be further scrutinize on its validity & the fairness of rejection.
2. Not just simply and easily of accepting the reason(s) of rejection.
3. It is the insured right to have a fair compensation and treatment.
4. A responsible Agent will always be looking after the insured right and interest.
5. Selection of a qualify agent is very crucial, they play an important role as when claim arises.
6. The School has extended their appreciation to Dindings Corporate Insurance Agency (DCIA) as below: –

The claim was approved on the same day – in ONE Working Day.

The reasons for the fast claim approval: –

1. Immediately report of the claim by the insured;
2. Fast action by the agent to liaise with the insured for the required claim documents;
3. Proper advice and guidance given by the agent on the claim processing;
4. Good working relationship between the agent and the insurance company;

It is important to appoint a professional and knowledgeable agent who is well versed with insurance matters and has strong partnership with the insurance company.

1. The claim was approved for RM648K++
2. Losses for individual house owners were rejected, reason “Personal properties and renovation done by house owners are not covered under the policy”.

Amongst other things, insured should take note of the important of the attending agent: –

1. Quick respond to notify insurer;
2. Immediate action to arrange Adjuster visit on the same day of the incident without delay;
3. Coordination of the claims submission to ensure the full completion of required documentation.
4. Appropriate advice and proper guidance during the entire claims process;
5. Follow-up action on the claims progress at all time;
6. Review the final Claims Offer to ensure it is a fair compensation.

A professional and knowledgeable agent will not only to ease your burden during the claims process, and the most challenging is to speed up the claim approval within the shorter timeline.

The claim was rejected due to below reasons: –

1. Breached of policy general condition as insured did not notified the insurer on the material change in the risk whereby the Main Contractor was terminated and a new contractor was appointed.
2. The loss was not notified to the insurer within 14 days which again had breached the Policy Condition as it had jeopardized the insurer right to mitigate the risk/avoid the recurrence of the lost.
3. The claim had fell within the Exclusion Clause that states “The insurer will not indemnify the insured in respect of loss, damage of liability directly caused by or arising out of aggravated by cessation of work whether total or partial”

Insured should ensure that a proper project management is in placed which should include the followings: –

1. Proper personnel to be employed to manage a project.
2. Roles, duty and responsibility of each personnel in the project team is clearly assigned.
3. Proper channel of reporting with full documentation is a crucial.
4. Timely and frequent updating on the progress of the project, so that any incident could be highlighted and immediate action to be taken.

In addition, insured to appoint a reputable and professional insurance agent to provide proper advice & guidance on their insurance protection.

The water leakage was caused by the bursting water pipes due to aging, wear & tear of the said pipes. The claims for the repair were fully approved. However, the claims by the shop owners or tenants were rejected.

It was clearly stated in the Tenancy Agreement that it is the duty and responsibility of all tenants to have their own insurance coverages for their stocks, renovations, equipment and all assets & contents in their shop respectively.

The buildings fire policy only covered the building structure and fittings and not inclusive of the contents in the individual shop.

The Mall Management Public Liability would not be responsible to third party claim as the tenant had “pre-agreed” in the Tenancy Agreement to be fully responsible for their own property and would not proceed with subrogation claim against the mall management. Therefore, the third party claim is not apparent in this case.

As the tenant or shop owner, it is a MUST to have their own insurance policy protection.

This will provide a clear area of responsibility and duty between both the landlord and tenants.

By doing so, it will also avoid any unnecessary argument or dispute that may arises when incident happened.

At the same time the Tenant shall arrange the protection to protect their own interest. As the loss or damage could come from their owner negligent (property damage claim) and the negligent may cause damage to other tenants as well (3^rd Party claim).

1. A professional Agent that always prepared to help the insured/ claimant especially when there is a claim arises
2. It is the duty of the Agent to negotiate for a timely and fair claim settlement.
3. Lacking in project management skill, may cause the unnecessary damages such as project costs overrun or losses, and delay in completion.

The Adjuster also proposed the “Risk Improvement”: –

 “There is a MUST for the Project Manage or Site Supervisor to conduct daily checking to all floors, and make sure the site conditions are in order before going off.”

Claim was approved for RM20,000++.
Adjuster findings, only 4 units of the 6 units were payable, claim for two units were rejected as both units (2A & 2B) were vacant and fall under the PIAM Revised Fire Tariff general exclusion clause under Section 5, item 7b(a).

i.e. Bursting or overflowing of water tanks apparatus or pipes is under exclusion, as when the building is vacant and unattended for more than 90 days period.

Insured shall always update and inform your agent or insurer for your premise if there are any changes of
1) The business activities/occupations; and
2) Any major extension/renovation.

In order that the needed protection is in place and/or waiver of exclusion has been granted, if necessary.

Tower House Unit 1 (1A – Occupied & 1B – Vacant); consider occupied.

Tower House Unit 2 (2A & 2B – Vacant); consider overall Vacant.

The Adjuster took a little longer time to finalize the claim offer due to: –

1. There was an argument whether there was an “extended coverage” of the subsidence landslip in the policy.
2. The substantial amount of the claim. For higher amount of claim, they need more details investigation.

Adjuster findings: –

For normal subsidence landslip, they only cover the damages to building structure and any build-in infrastructures in the building.

With an “Extended” coverage, it will cover the damages for those infrastructures outside the building but within the boundary (i.e. within/inside the fencing).

The claim was only approved for the repair costs of the water outlet system amounting to RM75,000++.

The replacement of the drainage and the soil enhancement on the surrounding area were NOT payable.

The reasons: –

1. Any enhancement or protection upgrade is not cover under the policy.
2. The ownership of the drainage was under the Authority not part of the condo or insured building.

1. The Subsidence Landslip perils must be extended with Deletion (A) clause, in order to include the coverage for the infrastructures outside the building but within the fencing.
2. In this case if without the extended coverage the claim will be fully rejected. The repair costs for the water outlet would not be payable, as it was located outside the building.
3. Getting a proper advice is crucial for a comprehensive insurance coverage.

Claim approved within 45 days with final offer of RM117,000++.

Adjuster findings, the installed equipment was heavy and large, and the theft incident may not be happening in one (1) day.  It could be 2 incidents or more.

How to have a speedy claim approval even with substantial claim amount?

1. The Insured’s Role:-

• Fast action of notification;
• Full corporation with Adjuster;
• Submission of Claim Form & required documentation without delay

2. The Agent’s Duty:-

• Professional advice;
• Closely monitoring & following-up the claim process;
• A Star Club Qualifier by having the “Fast Track Claim” privilege treatment from insurance company.
• Strong relationship with insurance company

The claim was approved and paid within 2 weeks period.

1. Fast and accurate advice from an insurance agent is important especially during claim.
2. The 3^rd Party Vehicle claim might be drag to 3-6 months for the settlement.
3. And for a straight forward own damage claim can be settled within 14 working days.
4. When comes to selection of Insurance Agent, make sure they are reputable and professional.

There was not negligence or wrong doing of the JMB that caused of the damages. In fact, it was the dog owner who was negligence in not able to manage and control the dog that resulted in the tuition teacher been bitten.

The Claims was rejected.
Any claims toward the liability policy, it must be a proof of wrongful act or negligence by the JMB.
The visitor (tuition teacher) may seek for the dog owner for Personal Liability.

Refer to the Error & Omission coverage terms: –
Firstly, there should be a proof of any “Wrongful Act” by the JMB. However, in this case there was none.

In addition, under the definition of loss it does not covers for legal costs in defend, as when the JMB is not liable.
The extract from the policy jacket: –

The Claims was rejected.

Majority of the Liability policy does not cover for legal fees. There are two versions of coverage terms provided by the insurers in the market, one with the inclusive of legal costs for defend, and the other is not. Of course, with the inclusion, the premium charged will be higher.

It was a clear-cut case that the policy is liable for the damages and the claims is payable. And more time taken to finalize due to the substantial claims submitted early.

The Claims was approved with the final amount of RM271K++.

1. It is not advisable to have only “One” quotation from a single supplier. To get few quotations for comparison and seek advices from different suppliers.
2. It is the insured responsibility to review and negotiate before submitting the claims to insurance company.
3. The bigger value of claims or damages will trigger more details of investigation.
4. Additional expert’s view is needed to arrive on a fair compensation and also for statutory compliance purposes.
5. Time needed to let those relevant experts to come out with their findings and report.
6. The insurer needs longer time to finalize the claims and it may cause delay.
7. The condo residents are the victim for more longer inconvenience period, without a proper working lift for their daily activity.

As per stated in the current condo policy, all residents together with the JMB was named as the insured or the owner of the policy. Therefore, as the owner of the policy, the resident is not entitled to make any claim under their own public liability policy.

The claim was rejected with the reason that it is no logical sense for the owner of a policy to claim for their own Public Liability. The Public Liability policy is to protect the insured for damages or bodily injury claim from a third party.
We are not convinced and happy with the outcome and decided to further appeal on this case.

After looked into the details, we found out that it was an “error” in the policy issued. There are two parts of coverages under the normal condo policy packages: –
– Part 1 is for the building fire and;
– Part 2 is the miscellaneous classes which more relevant to the daily operations of the JMB, such as burglary/theft, equipment all risk, petty cash, error and omission, others and public liability is included under this section.

Because of the insurer “condo promotion package”, the policy has been named as one.
Under the normal circumstances if without the promotion, there will be two separate named section i.e. Part 1 is named under all residents and JMB; Part 2 is named under the JMB only.

In view of the above, we submitted an appeal on the JMB behalf based on the above findings. Finally, the insurer accepted and agreed with our argument, and the claims was approved.

Please do check and make sure your condo policy is named under two separate sessions: –

Part 1 (Building Fire) – named under all residents together with JMB;
Part 2 (Misc. classes) – the JMB alone is the insured or named owner.

Since the origin of object could not be verified it was confirmed as not a part of the condo property and does not belongs to the condo. Hence no evidence of wrongful act by the Management and the insurance policy was not liable for the compensation.

The claim was rejected. It was obvious that there was no negligence by the Condo Management.

However, we managed to appeal successfully on behalf of the Management. Basing on our strong relationship with the insurer and on the ground of humanity, the insurer agreed with our proposal to pay. This was a genuine case as the student was really suffering due to the injury. Moreover, it was an honest claim, the student only submitted for his medical bills together with the spectacle replacement cost. It was a fair claim and the amount was reasonable.

The incident was classified as ”Act of God” as it was beyond the control of the Management. Hence the claim under Public Liability was not payable but due to the strong relationship between the serving agent and the insurer the claim was finally paid.

The lost was confirmed cover under the policy. The claims were payable.

First Building;
Total claims = RM150K++
Claim approved = RM50K, as per the sum insured on first loss basis.

Second Building:
Total Claims = RM80K++
Claim approved and paid full. Sum insured @RM100K on first loss basis.

• It is important to review and to make sure the sum insured is adequate.
• Don’t ever just pick and follow the sum insured as per the standard packages offered by the insurer.
• The service quality of the security company must possess a reasonable level of standard.
• If possible, the security company must have their “Error and Omission or Public Liability” policy in place.
• To take serious measure such as make sure the generator room is locked at all the time.
• And also, there will be compulsory routine check by the security guard too.
• Additional risk measurement: –

1. To install a CCTV at the entrance of the generator room; and
2. To install an alarm system to the door.

There were no evidence to show that Mall Management was negligence or did any wrongful act. No toilet cleaning activity was held during the time of accident, if there was then the management would be blamed for not displaying the caution signage “wet floor” at the toilet entrance.

Moreover, everyone has a responsibility for their own safety when using the public toilet, knowing that the toilet floor could not be dry all the times.

Based on the adjuster finding and the policy’s wording, the claim was not payable.

However, the serving agent took into consideration of the following: –

1. Mall business reputation and to avoid unnecessary retaliation that could affect the businesses;
2. On humanity ground that she did suffered pain due to the injury;
3. Her honesty to claim only for her medical bills;
4. The strong relationship between the servicing agent and the insurer.

The insurer approved the claim for her medical bills.

It is important to choose a right candidate as your Insurance Agent who would assist you when needed especially during claim. The agent relationship with the insurer is also a critical path in deciding the claim outcome.

Upon submission of the full set of claim documents to the insurer on 7 April 2020, time 2.10pm, the claim was approved and Settlement Letter received from the insurer same day, time 5.10pm (3 hours later).

How to speed up the claim processing: –
1. A claim must be genuine, the key insurance principle is for recovery of the losses only; and not to make any profit.
2. A full set claim documentation is important, such as the claim from; incident report; police report; quotation; photos and etc.
3. All documentation must be in order and the claim form must be fully completed and duly signed.
4. The cooperation and fast action taken by the insured is also very important.

Full set of claim documents were submitted on 8^th April 2020 to the insurer and claim offer was issued on 17^th April 2020 and claim for RM36k plus was paid on 27^th April 2020.

Prevention is always better than cure: –

• Better to engage a reliable and trusted transporter when transporting important and expensive materials.
• There must be a contract drawn up whereby the responsibility of the transporter is clearly and fully stated.
• The insurance claim only allowed for the actual replacement costs or the cost value of the goods; and NOT the selling price which inclusive of the profit margin. The principle of insurance “compensation or reimbursement of the losses”.