Forum takes serious note of insurance firms dragging cases
New Delhi: A consumer forum here has taken a serious note of insurance companies not entertaining claims and dragging cases by repeatedly taking adjournments, saying it is their "high headedness".
The West Delhi District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, presided over by Bimla Makin, made the observations while directing Tata AIG General Insurance Company Ltd and its agent Rohit Kumar to settle the claim of a Delhi resident whose car was insured with it and to pay him Rs 25,000 compensation.
"It is not only a deficiency in service but it is the high headedness of insurance company that after receiving premium, the insurance claims are not entertained and when a customer approaches a forum for redressal of his grievance, his case is dragged seeking adjournments only and sending munshis (clerks).
"We take a very serious view of this conduct of the opposite party. Complaint is allowed," the forum said.
The forum, also comprising its members Urmila Gupta and Smita Shankar, passed the order on the complaint filed by Harpal Singh against the insurance company and its agent.
Singh said in the complaint that his car, which was insured with the insurance company, had met with an accident in December 2012 and on approaching the firm, he was told that his policy was cancelled without citing any reason.
He told the forum that his policy premium was Rs 7,741 but he had paid Rs 7,100.
He was advised by the company to get his vehicle repaired and file a claim.
But when he again filed the claim after getting the car repaired from outside, he neither received any reply from the company nor his claim was settled, Singh said, adding he had spent Rs 68,000 on the repairs.
The forum noted that since the time of filing of the complaint, either munshi or proxy counsel were appearing on behalf of the insurance company and seeking adjournments and no advocate was contesting the case inspite of filing of 'vakalatnama'.
It said that even if the full premium was not paid, the policy cannot be cancelled unilaterally without giving an opportunity to the complainant to pay the balance amount or at least to intimate him that his policy was being cancelled.