Delay in settling claim: insurance firm asked to pay Rs 20K
For delay in settling accident claim, consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, directed Oriental Insurance Company Limited to pay Rs 20,000 as compensation to a Panchkula resident.chandigarh Updated: Feb 28, 2014 22:11 IST
For delay in settling accident claim, consumer disputes redressal forum, Chandigarh, directed Oriental Insurance Company Limited to pay Rs 20,000 as compensation to a Panchkula resident.
Disposing of the complaint filed by Gian Inder Sharma, a resident of Sector, Panchkula, on February 25, the forum directed the insurance company to pay Rs 10,000 as cost of litigation.
Gian Inder Sharma, in his complaint, said his Wolkswagon Polo, insured with insurance firm, met with an accident in March 2013 at Karnal.
He claimed that his requests for early settlement of the claim despites repeated reminders as personal visits, failed to get response from the company.
Sharma said, “He has been unnecessarily harassed by the insurance company for about 106 days and he was handicapped without the vehicle because he had to travel on hired vehicle daily for his professional commitments.”
The insurance firm denied any deficiency in services and said the claim had been disbursed to Sharma's account well within the time frame of the IRDA guidelines.
The consumer forum, presided over by PL Ahuja, said, “Delay in settling the claim was on account of the act and conduct of insurance company and not the workshop as claimed by the insurance company.”
“The complainant has been approaching the insurance firm time and again to take early action but the insurance company had not finalized the matter even after a lapse of 75 days. Ultimately, the payment was made to the complainant after 106 days of the accident of his vehicle. Consequently, we feel that though the claim was settled….. yet the circumstances clearly point out towards delayed payment on account of the indecisiveness on the part of officers of insurance company to settle the matter at the earliest, despite it being a clear case of total loss basis. Thus, guilty of deficiency in service, for which, the complainant is entitled to compensation.”