CHAPTER 6
RESPONDENTS VIEWS ON ACCIDENTS AND MOTOR INSURANCE
‘6.1 PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
6.2 AWARENESS OF MOTOR INSURANCE
6.3 OPINION ON MOTOR INSURANCE POLICIES 6.4 CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE POLICY
6.5 REASONS FOR DISCONTINUATION OF INSURANCE 6.6 OPINION ABOUT INSURANCE PREMIUM
6.7 CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS 6.8 TIME OF ACC I DENTS
6.9 REASONS FOR NOT CLAIMING COMPENSATION 6.10 CLAIMS FOR LABOUR CHARGES
6.11 CLAIM FOR SPAREPARTS
6.12 STEPS TO BE TAKEN FOR SPEEDY CLAIM SETTLEMENT
*
CHAPTER 6
RESPONDENTS VIEWS ON ACCIDENTS AND MOTOR INSURANCE
In the previous chapter, the secondary data pertaining to motor accidents in and around Kolhapur,
maharashtra and different selected cities, districts was \ analysed. In the present chapter an attempt is made to
understand the awareness of insurance among the transport operators, their opinions on cases of accidents, and experience related to the settlement of the claims.
The data was collected by administering a questionnaire to the drivers/owners of the vehicles on different types of roads and at selected places. Through the administration of the questionnaire, 202 filled responses were collected. These are analysed in the following sub-sections.
6.1 PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS
TABLE 6.1 shows the age profile and the education of the respondent drivers/owners, according to the type of vehicles.
131
TABLE 6.1 AGE AN1) EDUCATION OF RESPONDENTS
TYPE OF VEHICLE
UPTO 18
A 18 -
40G E
40-60EDUCATION
60 ABOVE LITERATE ILLITERATE
ASHOK LEYLAND -
76 - 11 2
TRUCK
-37 10
- 416
TOTAL
- 44(73.33)
16 (26.67)
-
52(86.67) 8
(13..33)
FIAT
-2
-1 3
-AMBASSADOR
-6 - 2 8 -
MARUTI
-10 5 2 16 1
JEEP
-27
4i 28
4TOTAL
- 45 96 55
5-
(75.00) ( 15.00) (10.00) (91.67)(8.33) . .
THREE WHEELER 3 33 2 1 36 3
(7.69) (8
4.62) (5.12) (2.67) (92.30) (17.60)
SCOOTER
41 9 8 3 31 3
MOTORCYCLE 1 8
-~ 9
-TOTAL
527 8 3
403
(11.62) (.62.79) (20.-51) (6.58) (.93.02) (6.38)
ALL TOTAL 8 27
a 3 403
(3.96) (73. 76) (17.32) (
4.96) (90.59) (9.41)
«
132
It is observed that out of total 202 respondents \ only three respondents driving three wheeler and five
respondents driving two wheelers are not eligible to drive
according to the Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 1982.
According to this Amendment, a driver passing a licence should have a minimum age of 18 years old.
In the age of 18 to 40 years, there are 44 drivers, driving trucks (37), Ashok Layland (7) vehicles. Whereas, there are 45 respondents driving different types of light four wheeler vehicles. Similarly, there are 27 respondents driving different types of two wheeler vehicles. It should be noted here that driving licence is given upto 40 years of age at the time of issue. Thereafter, it has to be renewed after every five years. There are 16 respondents driving heavy vehicle having age in the range of 40 to 60 years.
Whereas, there are 15 respondents driving light four wheeler vehicle. There are 6 respondents driving car/jeep and 3 respondents driving two wheelers whose age is more than 60 years. Thus, the sample obtained in the present study represents the drivers/owners of motor vehicles in all the age groups.
When one considers the education of the driver/owner
the majority (90.59 per cent) of them are literate.
1 3 3
Whereas, 9.41 per cent are illiterate. The proportion of the illiteracy is observed to be more in case of light four wheeler and heavy vehicle drivers than that of two wheelers.
6.2 AWARENESS OF MOTOR INSURANCE
TABLE 6.2 shows the awareness of various motor insurance policies among the respondents surveyed in the present study. It is observed that out of 202 respondents,
7 7.72 per cent are aware of one or more motor insurance policy. Whereas, 22.28 per cent drivers/owners are totally unaware of existance of any motor insurance policy.
Out of 157 persons having knowledge about motor insurance policy, 48 belong to heavy vehicle, 45 drive light four wheeler vehicle, 27 drive three wheelers and 37 drive two wheelers . Out of 45 respondents who are not knowing anything about motor insurance, 12 are heavy vehicle drivers, 15 light vehicle drivers, 12 three wheeler operators, and 6 two wheeler drivers.
Out of the three motor insurance policies, namely Act Only Policy, Comprehensive Policy and Third Party Insurance Policy, the latter is known by majority of the
134
TABLE 6.2 AWARENESS OF MOTOR INSURANCE POLICIES
TYPE OF VEHICLE AWARENESS ACT COMPREHENSIVE THIRD YES NO ONLY POLICY PARTY TOTAL
ASUOK LEYLAND 8 5 8 4 8 8
TRUCK 40 7 35 20 35 - 40
TOTAL 4 8 12 43 42 43 48
(80.00) (20.00) (89.58) (87.50) (89.58) (100)
FIAT 3 - 3 3 3 3
AMBASSADOR 8 - 8 7 8 8
MARUTI 14 3 14 5 13 14
JEEP 20 12 10 8 19 20
TOTAL 4 5 1 5 35 P 3 4 3 45
(75.00) (25.00) (77.78) (51.11) (95.96) ilOO)
THREE WHEELER 27 12 22 20 22 27
(69.23) (30.77) (81.48) ( 74.07) (81.48) (100)
SCOOTER 28 6 15 6 20 28
MOTORCYCLE . t
9 ~ 1 - 5 9
TOTAL 37 6 16 6 25 37
(86.04) (13.96) (43.24) (16.22) (67.56) (100)
ALL TOTAL 157 45 116 91 133 157
(
77.
72) (
22.
28) (
77.
88) (
57.
96) (
84.
71) (
100)
The percentage in insurance policy row does not total 100 due to multiple responses by the respondents
NOTE :
135
respondents (133) followed by Act Only Policy (116), and comprehensive policy (91). It needs to be noted here that a typical respondent was also aware of one of more insurance policies.
Out of 48 heavy vehicle drivers, majority were knowing all the three types of motor insurance policies.
Whereas, in case of light four wheeler drivers majority (43 out of 45) were aware of Third Party insurance, followed by Act Only Policy (35) and comprehensive policy (23).
In case of three wheeler vehicle drivers, the knowledge about the three policies among 27 respondents was satisfactory.
Similar to the case of car/jeep drivers, two wheeler drivers were mainly knowing third party insurance (25 out of 37), followed by Act Only Policy (16 out of 37) and Comprehensive Policy (6 out of 37).
The total analysis reveals that in the present sample, knowledge regarding comprehensive policy was inadequate. In fact, Comprehensive Policy covers wider risk and needs to be known and subscribed to for getting maximum benefits.
1 3 6
It was repo r tod by 4 5 respondents that they have not bothered to know various insurance policies because either they were not concerned or the insurance matters were exclusively dealt by insurance agent only, or it was not compulsary on their part to know by law or R. T. 0.
6.3 OPINION ON MOTOR INSURANCE POLICIES
The respondents were asked to rank their opinion in five scales from GOOD to NO COMMENTS. TABLE 6.3 shows that out of 202 respondents, 64 respondents have registered excellent opinion and 90 good opinion. Whereas, 38 have stated that they had bad experience followed by 8 respondents with extremely bad opinion. Four respondents have not given any opinion. The overall analysis of the table shows that three-forth of the respondents have good opinion about motor insurance.
It was reported by the respondents that they have good opinion and experience regarding various motor insurance policies due to different reasons given below :
a) Acceptance of risk by the company before any loss or damage or accident occurs.
b) Payment of third party claims by the insurance company.
137
TABLE 6.3 OPINION ON MOTOR INSURANCE
TYPE OF VEHICLE EXCELLENT GOOD BAD BAD
VERY BAD
NO COMMENT
TOTAL
ASHOK LEYLAND 2 6 3 1 1 13
TRUCK 15 11 1 7 2 2 47
TOTAL 1 7 1 7 20 3 3 60
(28.33) (33.34) (5.00) (5.00) (5.00) (100)
FIAT 1 2 - - - 3
AMBASSADOR 5 2 1 - - 8
MARUTI 9 6 1 1 - 1 7
JEEP 7 21 1 2 1 32
TOTAL 22 31 3 3 1 60
(51.66) (36.66) (5.00) (5.00) (1.67) (100)
THREE WHEELER 27 5 7 - 39
(69.23) (12.82) (17.95) — (100)
SCOOTER 15 13 5 2 - 22
MOTORCYCLE 3 5 1 — — 9
TOTAL 15 20 6 2 - 43
(34.88) (A 6.51) (13.95) (5.12) (100)
ALL TOTAL 90 64 36 8 4 202
f44.55) (31.68) (17.82) (3.96) (1.98) (100)
7
38
c) Payment of loss or damage by the company, in some cases was very prompt.
d) The owners of the vehicle got financial assistance in case of dire need.
e) The funds collected through the premium by the insurance company are partly invested in socio-economic development of the country.
In contrast to the above, 25 per cent of the respondents who have registered bad impression about motor insurance have
attributedthis to the following.
a) The rate of premium is comparatively more.
b) Insurance company does not pay entire loss or damage incurred by them, only part of the claim is normally settled.
c) Normally, claim settlement takes long time, and at times, it is frustrating experience.
d) Lot of documents are involved, which consume more valuable time from their business activities.
e) Many times, insurance officials as well as surveyors show non-cooperative attitude and look claim as a false claim or inflated claim.
f) Some times, discrepancies in Panchanama
1 3 9
report, surveyor's report and other documents hinder the claim processing activity and results in delay in claim settlement.
6.4
CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE POLICY
TABLE 6.4 shows how many respondents continued the motor insurance policy after the purchase of vehicle. Out of 202 respondents, only 7 have not continued the insurance policy. Out of these seven, six are two wheeler operators and only one three wheeler operator. The heavy vehicle as well as the light four vehicle owners have continued the insurance policy right from the purchase date till today.
Out of 195 respondents, 79 have purchased vehicle in three years time, 67 have purchased during 3 to 6 years, 44 are using over a period of 6 to 9 years and 5 respondents have been operating for more than 9 years. All these respondents have continued the policy from the date of purchase.
6.5
REASONS FOR DISCONTINUATION OF INSURANCE
Out of 202 sample cases, 7 transport operators have not continued their respective insurance policy. The reasons given by these respondents are listed in TABLE 6.5.
.7 4 0
TABLE 6.4 CONTINUATION OF INSURANCE COVER
TYPE OF VEHICLE OPINION POLICY CONTINUED FOR
YES NO 1-3 3-6 6-9 > 9
ASHOK LEYLAND 13 ~ 8 ot 2 -
TRUCKi 47 5 18 21 3
TOTAL 60 - 13 21 23 3
(100) - (21.67) (35.00) (38.33) (5.00)
FIAT 3 - 1 2 - -
AMBASSADOR 8 - 2 4 2 -
MARUTI 1 7 - 11 4 2 -
JEEP 32 ~ 30 1 1
TOTAL 60 - 44 11 5 -
(100) - (73.33) (18.33) (8.34) -
SCOOTER 28 6 10 19 - -
MOTORCYCLE 9 3 3 1 1
TOTAL 37 6 13 22 1 1
(86.04) (13.96) (26.53) (51.16) (2.32) (2.32)
THREE WHEELER 38 1 9 13 15 1
(97.43) (2.57) (23.07) (33.33) (38.46) (2.54)
ALL TOTAL 195 7 79 67 44 5
(95.12) (4.88) (38.53) (32.68) (21.46) (7.33)
1 4 1
TABLE 6.5 REASONS FOR DISCONTINUATION OF INSURANCE POLICY
REASON RESPONDENTS
Premium is too much 2
Inadequate compensation 3
No use of insurance -
Old vehicle 2
Other “
TOTAL 7
As is observed from the earlier table that out of 7 respondents, 6 are two wheeler owners and one three wheeler owner. The above table reflects that 3 respondents discontinued the insurance policy due to inadequate compensation by the insurance company in their earlier claims. Whereas, two wheeler owners felt that the insurance premium is comparatively more and hence, cannot be continued. The other two respondents stopped subscribing policy because their vehicle has become old and felt that the economic value of the vehicle is fairly less, so that it would not be worth proposition to have an insurance cover.
142
<
It needs to be mentioned here that though the motor insurance is now compulsory for a vehicle, irrespective of any reason, especially before the Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 1982, there was increasing tendency in case of two wheeler owners to discontinue the policy after one or two years. According to the Amendment, from 1982 the insurance subscription has become compulsory for a period of 10 years and the full amount has to be paid at the time of purchase of vehicle itself along with the road tax. Furthermore, heavy penalty may be imposed for not having any insurance cover for driving any kind of vehicle on roads.
6.6 OPINION ABOUT INSURANCE PREMIUM
To understand the feelings of the respondents about the insurance premium they pay, the answer was sought three scales. This is shown in TABLE 6.6 .
TABLE 6.6 OPINION ABOUT INSURANCE PREMIUM
OPINION RESPONDENTS
Premiurn is too much 146
Fair premium 34
No opinion 22
TOTAL 202
The majority of the respondents (146 out of 202) with reluctance, opined that the insurance premium for all the types of vehicles is comparatively high. They further retorted that if the premium is not paid in time fine has to paid. Furthermore, if no accident occurs i n the period of policy, the amount of premium accumulated i s not paid back to the motor owner and this is a substantial lo ss to the owner.
On the other hand, only 16.83 per cent respondents are of the opinion that the premium is fair as compared to the risks covered for the respective insurance policy held by them.
There are 22 respondents who have not given any response to the question. This is because they were totally ignorant of the amount of premium taken as well as the risks covered by the policy since these matiers are exclusively handled by the insurance agent or by the dealer of the vehicle from where the purchase is made.
6.7 CAUSES OF ACCIDENT
The respondents were asked to give based on their experience the causes of road accidents. These are listed in TABLE 6.7.
144
TABLE 6.7 CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS
CAUSES RESPONDENTS PERCENT At
Careless driving 133 65.8 4
Pedestrian fault 23 11.38
Technical difficulty 20 9.92 Bad road condition 16 7.92
Rainy season 5 2.47
Others 5 2.47
TOTAL 202 100
The majority of the respondents (65.8 4 per cent) reported that the main cause of any accident is carelessness of driver involved in the accident. The pedestrian careless ranks second among the causes of accident (11.38 per cent).
On the other hand, technical problem is another important reason from the point of view of 9.92 per cent respondents.
Indian roads, generally, are highly commented roads in terms of bad condition and maintenance. Out of the total
202 respondents, 16 have attributed to poor road condition. \ A minor proportion of the vehicle drivers/owners, 2.47 per
cent each attribute to rainy season and miscellaneous reason
1
4 5respectively. The latter include dazzling lights at night time, sudden road crossing by the animal or person, narrow roads, sharp turns, poor visibility especially in rainy season and winter in ghats, emergency technical snag, lack of preventive maintenance and ego of driver.
6.8 TIME OF ACCIDENT
TABLE 6.8 shows, from the point of view of the drivers in the survey, the time of occurance of accident.
TABLE 6.8 TIME OF ACCIDENT
TIME OF ACCIDENT FREQUENCY PERCENTAGE
Morning 39 19.33
After noon 23 11.38
Evening
4120.29
Ni gh t 99
49.00
TOTAL 202 100
of the
It is noted from the table above that the majority
respondents
(49 percent) are of the view that the
1 4 6
accidents, in genral, take place at night time. Whereas, 25.29 per cent opined that accidents occur at evening time due to poor visibility. On the other hand, 11.38 per cent drivers feel that the accidents take place in afternoon as well as 19.33 per cent think that accidents do take place in
morning time.
^The above views however, have been observed to be contradictory to the secondary data gathered on the time of actual occurance of accidents in Chapter 5. It is noted here again that the percentage of day accidents have steadily increasing than the night time accidents.
6.9 REASONS FOR NOT CLAIMING COMPENSATION
Out of 202 respondents, it is observed that 28 have not submitted the claim for compensation. The various reasons put forth by them are shown in TABLE 6.9.
It is observed from the table that 7 respondents
were disqualified for claiming the compensation since they
have not paid the insurance premium inspite of giving
notices. If the accident occurs when the past premiums are
not paid, theinsured is not eligible to ask for the
compensation for any loss/damage.
V
14 7
TABLE 6.9 REASONS FOR NOT APPLYING FOR COMPENSATION
REASON RESPONDENTS
Premium is not paid in time 7
Inadequate documents 1
Absence of Panchan ama report 3
Loss is very less 6
Compensation paid is very less 4
Legal difficulties 1
Not met with accident so far 6
TOTAL 28
Six respondents have not encountered with any accident after the purchase of the vehicle. Hence, there was no question of putting any claim for compensation.
On the other hand, in case of six respondents the 1oss/damage i n the accident was too meagre that they have foregone the ri gh t of claiming the loss/damage. They reported that it was wise on their part not to put any claim, otherwise they would have to sacrifice lot of time, money and energy in getting their claim settled.
t
148
Four transport operators also have not submitted the claims this time because in past, they were paid very less by the insurance company than thr claimed amount.
Furthermore, the inordinate delay and the amount of doc—umentation involved compelled them not to go for the same .
Panchanama report is one of the important document required in settlement of the claim and the settlement procedure. In case of three respondents there was absence of proper panchanama report in their claim documents.
Due to inadequate and incomplete documents and legal difficulties, two respondents have not submitted the claims.
6.10 CLAIM FOR LABOUR CHARGES
Out of 202 respondents in the present study, 174 met
with an accident in past and claimed the labour expenses
involved in the repairs. TABLE 6.10 shows the vehiclewise
labour charges claimed by the respondents and the amount
received from the insurance company. This is shown as the
percentage amount received to the amount claimed.
1 4 9
RECEIVED
A , ,. v ^ *
*& V
*-J CM oo5 .
78i 1 co 1 ro
5 .9 0
1 t i
2 .
70 74 .0 5
co 13
1 3 2 5 .0 0
i in
1 3 .7 2
CO
8 .8 3
sr 1 Sf
sf
O
27 1 5 .5 1
OFLABOURESTIMATE Tp
,w
;vCO 11
20 3 3 .4 6
t-H sf Sf sf
1 3
CD '3- U1 CM
17
3 4 .0 0
10 CM12
Sf sf CM CO
6 2 3 5 .6 3
CM oo
to 48
7 .6 9 1 5 .3 8
CM
i c\
i sf
811
6 1
61 7 .6 4 3 7 .2 5
sr
o
2 9 .4 1 1 1 .7 6
sr
CD 32
1 2
63 2 .4 3 1 6 .2 2 3 5 37 2 0 .1 1 2 1 .2 6
hi ^
(J M
so ^
a: ^ a u * ^ / fa! 'Ha
*S 5
V 7
CM
1 CM
1 Sf
1
7 .6 9
i
i i
i
i 1
1
t 1 CM 1
1
CM
5 .4 0
63 .4 4
% /as>>
A,. *s
§ ^
§
<5 cy
_ Hs'
Q
hi X/
fc-, y
■*35 J
as
*°a,'
*-<
to 'y
hi >%
1 CM
1 .9 2
i CO sr co
5 .8 4
1 4
2 .2 9
63
1 7
182 0 2 5 3 8 .4 6 4 8 .0 7
CO to
O 25 123
1 6
213 1 .3 7 4 1 .1 7
13133 8 .2 5 3 8 .2 5
sr
sr CM
1 5
64 0 .5 4 1 6 .2 2
646 5 3 6 .7 8 3 7 .3 5
sr iO
9 .6 3
(X 10
1 3 .4 6
20..58a
sr 154 0 .5 4 3 7 2 1 .2 9
LABOUR
/
sj. y 11 .9 2 1 .9 6
CMO)CM
i
2 .7 0
42 .2 9
VEHICLE c»
/°
LEYLAND TRUCK TOTAL PERCENTF IA T
AMBASSADOR MARUTI JEEP TOTAL PERCENT THREEWHEELER- PERCENT SCOOTER MOTORCYCLE tothi PERCENT ALLTOTAL PERCENTTABLE
6 .1 0
LABOURESTIMATESANDPROPORTIONOFCLAIMSETTLED150
It is observed from the table that out of 1 74 claims, 65 were for Rs. 10,001 to Rs. 50, 000 and 64 cl aims were for Rs. 5,001 to Rs . 10,000. There were 37 cases for Rs. 1,001 to 50,000 and 4 claims each for Rs . 501 to 1 , 000 .and Rs. 50,001 to Rs. 1,00,000.
In contrast to the labour estimates put by the claimants, the amount received from the insurance company is proportionately less. Out of total 1 74 claims for labour estimate, 62 claimants have received 40 to 50 per cent of the labour estimate amount. There were 37 claims which were settled up to 30 to 40 per cent of the labour amount claim.
Thir ty five claims were settled to the extent of 20 to 30 per cent of the claimed amount and six claimants received only 10 to 20 per cent of the amount claimed.
On the other hand, 27 out of 174 respondents received 50 to 60 per cent of the labour amount claimed.
Whereas, only seven claims were settled for 60 to 100 per cent of the labour amount claimed. It needs to be noted here that such claims however, were far less amount.
6.11
CLAIM FOR SPAREPART5
Out of 202 respondents surveyed 174 have claimed loss/damage in case of accident. Out of these 174 cases, only 164 have put the claim for spareparts estimate since
there was no need of either repairs or replacement of any part. TABLE 6.11 shows vehiclewise spareparts charges claimed by the respondents and the proportion of amount received from the insurance company.
It is observed that out of 164 claims, 4 3 were for Rs. 1,001 to Rs. 50,000 and 13 for Rs. 501 to Rs. 1,000.
There were 2 cases for amount below Rs. 500 and 41 cases for Rs. 5,001 to Rs. 10,000, 42 claims for Rs. 10,001 to Rs. 50,000 and 13 for Rs. 50,001 to Rs. 1 lakh.
In contrast to the spareparts estimates put by the respondents, the amount received from the insurance company is proportionately less. Out of total 164 claims, 45 have received 30 to 40 per cent of the claimed amount. There were 13 claims which have settled up to 2 0 to 4 0 per cent of the claim amount.
On the other hand, 38 claims have been settled to 40 to 5 0 per cent of the amount claimed. Th irtyseven claims
Q *
tO . tof*
til ft 05
£ % t-1
5' V.
til
1 CN CM
to co CO
1 cn 1 CN to
CM vp O vv
CO
2 5 .0 0
tx ID CO to o o-
co CM
1 7 .0 7
<D O CM
CO CM
cm CM vf vt
1 i J 1 1 1 o
I'M LO
<N
CD
cn o to CM
*~H
tN CO
to to CM CM
tx co to
to 03 CO CM
1 CNJ Xf M0 ’-i
<~V VV 03 CM CM
VP o in 04
oo • o o to CM
00 CO
Cn
*o CO CM r*.
2 'px
ft! ;>
to
O
\ o
*~l o
*v CO CM 03
CSJ co cn O
CM CN to vV vp
co O O in CN
tx i tN co
CM
If) CO vf
• Cn CM
1 CM CM
to CO co
CM 1 co xj- O)
to rs co
~V CM
in cn CD
i 1 co
**l CO 0) Cn
tno c'^
X
ft >
8 * 4*
g ^ tt, X
%- % '
v
1 1 ■ 1 1 1 CN CO
to CM to
1 1 i 1 co
CM CO
«o
1 1 1 1 i - 1 1 1 1 i 1 i 1 5 . i 1
1 1 l 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i ‘ 1 1
ti
§, X
o*t>,
*5
*5 X X
tn 9
I 'i,.
H v
tv • %
co
*4, .
Ml to o
*-v CO CM O)
»-i
i cn i to
to CM CO
1 i t i 1 co
CM 03 Cn
00 vf
<M Cn CM
CM cn
to
cn ■ LO l CO
CN CO 'to
vp '~V
CD tx cn xf
■ cn CO <M
SC O to to CM
*N co O
*V CO CM CO
*1
i co CN o to
vv M3 CM V CO
<o o o
*n CN
CO i CO vl-
O o to CM V,
to X.
Ev ^
ns
X <r CM % til V
OS V
X ‘O.
CM \i
to
to to
CM to O)
■ CM tx cn CO
*1 o to Cn CO
CO tx cn cn
CO
<-V cn
Cn
»-V
CO vl-
*v 03 to CM
f 1 i i i CM CN VP
CO co CO
to CN ID
in CM cn CO
CO 03
tN V
\
V l 1 1 1 i • i - 1 CM
DC til
*-s to to 5
to to OS to t-H
in CN ID
1 ■ ■ CM
CM CM
«-v
VEHICLE Q
S*S u to os fc~4
M Xtv Otv
tv 2;til u DS hi
CM
fri H
OS
OQ v$
to to
VS
cq
5 E~h
to ft; ft.
»n M
•<5 tv O
tv tv
2:
'oO aias a,
cn
CJ
cncn cn
ns
to tv o
Q U
to
toM
O
>V u ns
o
Ei
o
2«
to 5 o 6~t
•O tv O tv
•O
>o tv 2:to u
OS
tocu
TABLE
6 .1 1
SPAREPARTSESTIMATESANDPROPORTIONOFCLAIMSETTLED153
were settled in 50 to 60 per cent range and 28 claimants have to satisfy themselves with 60 to 100 per cent of the amount of spareparts dims.
6.12 STEPS TO BE TAKEN FOR SPEEDY SETTLEMENT
The respondents were asked to give their opinion on how to make the claim settlement more speedy. The options given by them are listed in the TABLE 6.
TABLE 6.12 SUGGESTIONS FOR SPEEDY 12.
CLAIM SETTLEMENT
SUGGESTION RESPONDENTS
Panchanama report be taken
by the insurance company itself
35
Immediate compensation be paid after repairs
137
Special department for claim settlement
67
Others 28
TOTAL 267
15 4
s
The table shows that the majority of the respondents (135 out of 202) are of the opinion that the compensation though, it cannot be given before the repairs but be paid immediately after the repairs. Some were of the opinion that there should be specific repairers appointed by the insurance company where the repairs can be carried out.
This may perhaps reduce all the hardships experienced by the respondents in getting the claims settled and the company will then •pay the amount directly to the repairers themselves.
Thirtyfive respondents were of the opinion that many times the Panchanama report is not obtained in time from the police station, and thus results in subsequent delay. In this case therefore, the insurance company at the organisational level should procure the Panchanama report direc 11y from the police station.
An important suggestion given by 67 respondents is that there is no special cell or department for settlement of claims in the insurance company office. Only one clerk esters to many jobs and this is another reason of inordinate delay in the settlement of claims. To worsen the situation, many clerks and officers are frequently transferred from one office to another. In such cases, the
new official
attitude of
155
