[基督城/坎特伯雷] 本来对保险知识的了解有限，因为Tower的保险公司所作所为。 [复制链接]

PKO

高级站友

Rank: 5 Rank: 5

升级 9%

UID: 388797
热情: 47
人气: 113
主题: 4
帖子: 52
精华: 0
积分: 109
阅读权限: 20
注册时间: 2014-9-18

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2014-11-15 09:44:14 |显示全部楼层 |倒序浏览 微信分享

本帖最后由 PKO 于 2014-11-15 10:45 编辑

我家的保险和很多大事从来都是我男人安排妥当，不用我操半点心。不过，因为对保险条例以及很多西方政治，政策法令法规的好奇，因此保持每天看新闻和报纸，登录Stuff.co.nz，看新西兰的电视新闻频道。最近有一位83岁的老护士的房屋保险经历，让我上了一堂深刻的保险常识课。这是关于Tower保险公司以忽视保险人，特别是年老残弱的保险人，他们以种种理由拒绝作出合理赔偿，即使这位老人向该保险公司投保27年，从来没有听过，但当地震大难来临，她的保险经理人却为难她，在沟通过程中还大声叫嚣。。。下面的链接，给有心人看的，意图是，希望大家为自己的房屋财产做保险之前，和选择保险公司时，要慎之又慎，还要了解保险公司的历史背景，不要被保险经纪人的专业术语和甜言蜜语所迷惑了，共勉：
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/63142752/Pearce-I-didn-t-insure-myself-for-a-Band-aid

Earthquake Services Ltd shared a link.November 13

Tower made over $30 million dollars profit last year and spent over $10 million dollars on advertising. Tower is the 3rd biggest spender on advertising, but they are certainly not the 3rd largest insurer. Yet they don't want to spend 12 pieces of silver to put 84-year old Eileen Pearce back in a home that is going to meet the requirements of her policy. Is this how Tower treat our elderly?
Tower will do anything so they don't have to pay full entitlement. They are trying to get the High Court to have our experts’ reports stuck out before trial saying they are not independent, but they say their Stream reports are independent. Any matters of independence are matters for the trial judge at a full trial. But Tower and their super lawyers don't want to face a trial and be judged the same as all others, they want the homeowner’s evidence struck out so theirs is the only evidence before the Court.
What Tower don’t realise is their action is a double-edged sword. In the unlikely event they are successful in having our reports struck out, the Court will be forced to hold them to the same standard. Tower’s reports will also be struck out for lacking independence (as well as those of all other insurance companies who have PMOs managing their claims). But the elephant in the room is that it will probably make all EQC reports ineligible to be used in Court because their reports are done by employees of EQC. It will cost the Government about a billion dollars to have all EQC reports re-done. That means you and I will be paying for it. In the wake of the Graeme Robinson affair that would be a great idea, but it might send the country broke. So what on the surface may seem to be a stab in the back of a little elderly lady by a corporate bully, the adverse effect this will have on the entire insurance industry and legal system is enormous.
It has not gone unnoticed that the only 2 insurers that would rather run cases to trial than settle claims fairly are Southern Response and Tower. The only 2 insurers that complain about the Council Flood management solutions are Southern Response and Tower. Southern Response’s excuse for this behaviour will be that they are trying to save the Government money. A very poor excuse indeed if you defend a case all the way to trial – a very expensive process - and lose. Tower has no excuse except maximising profit for its shareholders.
Now to the baby elephant in the room. If Tower gets their wish and our reports are struck out, then this will have a major impact on the number of cases filed in Court. Contrary to popular belief we do not file every case we have in Court. In fact we are only filing about 1 in 4. Unsurprisingly, the majority are against Southern Response and Tower because they refuse point blank to settle claims according to the policy entitlement. We don't even file against EQC any more unless they are joined with Southern Response or Tower on a particular file. The reason is that EQC and all other insurers except Southern Response and Tower trust and rely on our reports. If the Court strikes out our reports as not being independent, then we will have to start again rebuilding that hard fought credibility and we will once again have to start filing cases in the Court. The Court complains now about the 200 or so cases we have filed, when that number grows to 700 or 1,000 it will really have something to complain about. I don't know if the Court is aware of how much effort we put in to avoid the Court system, it is costly and slow and we do everything we can to avoid it. We now settle far more cases outside the Court system than within the system. It would be a disaster for all concerned if we are forced to start filing claims again just to re-establish the hard-earned credibility that Tower are seeking to destroy.