On January 31, the Brittoria High Court ruled a motor insurance case in which an insurer denied the policyholder’s claim after his vehicle was stolen.
According to the insurer’s rejection letter, the claim was denied because at the time of the theft of the policyholder, the insured vehicle failed to prove the operational monitoring device. The insurer further stressed that the policyholder had misrepresented the facts claiming that the vehicle was a functional tracker.
Earlier rulings – especially Fais Ombudsman – have addressed the failure of surveillance devices, these cases are involved in brokers who ignore such requirements to policyholders.
This case is significant that it strengthens the need to adhere to the regulations and conditions. Furthermore, it underlines the importance of policyholders honestly and immediately responding to the demands of the insurers during the Claim’s Investigation process.
Issue
The insurer first argued, which is the upcoming and, therefore, the documents that cannot be decided in the documents. In addition, the insurer argued that the policyholder had failed in accordance with the need for the policy of establishing a functional monitoring device. Finally, the insurer denied the value of the claim.
How did the matter come out?
The common cause of the parties was that a monitoring device was a compulsory need and the failure to establish one. In particular, such a failure can be the subject of the loss of the policyholder. Records pointed out that the policyholder was aware of the need during the writing and that a surveillance device was installed for the insurer.
