::
Case Review: Insurance
Summary of some of the decisions made by the Mediators on some of the complaints received by FMB.
This summary is for information only and should not be used for other purpose.
[Previous]………[Next]
FMB/GI 0043 - Ambiguity in Policy Document
The insured vehicle was in the custody of the insured's brother when it was stolen. The insurers declined the claim for indemnity for the loss of the insured vehicle on the ground that the vehicle was used/ridden by unauthorized rider. The insurers maintained that the policy schedule indicated the named driver as "the insured only".
The insured maintained that when he applied for the policy he had requested to extend the coverage to a named driver i.e his brother. This is reflected in the Motor Cover Note. It is also observed that the policy schedule indicated as follows:-
"Named Driver
1. The insured only
Authorised drivers
(A) The insured
(B) Any other person who is riding on the insured's order or with their permission"
The insurers maintained that their intention was to insure the named driver (the insured only) but conceded that there was some confusion in the manner in which the cover note/policy schedule was issued to the insured. The insurers revised their decision and approved the claim.
[Previous]………[Next]
|
