Dear Friends,

I am writing this compliant on behalf of my brother. The fact is that my brother was owning a Chevrolet Tavera White color, T-Board and it was stolen from the carriage where it was left for repairs. the police people filed a case based on the compliant given by the carriage owner and my brothers compliant was kept aside, and the non-traceable certificate was issued after 6 months. Also a final order from the court was also obtained and produced. Based on the promise by the insurance officials the vehicle finance is repaid by borrowing private loan from friends with penalty interest and NOC and Form 35 is also produced. even after all the papers produced the claim was repudiated on lame reasons. to get a clear idea u can also read the representation made to the grievance cell as appeal is given below. can any one help me how to proceed with the claim. Expecting help from good hearted friends.

regards
Raghuraman, Assistant Professor

Letter to grievance cell.

To
The Grievance Cell
National Insurance Company Limited,
Chennai Regional Office,
2nd Floor, No.190, Hamid Building, Annasalai,
Chennai - 600 006.

Sir,
Sub: Theft claim- Repudiated- The reasons for repudiation shown are based on assumption and not on facts - Request to review the claim application on real facts – reg.


Ref: 1. Letter No.500300/ Motor OD claim/RS/sk dated. 24.11.2009 from Divisional office III, Chennai.
2. OD Claim No.500300/31/09/6390000014
3. Policy No. 500300/31/08/6300000786
4. Policy Period - 31.12.2008 to 30.12.2009
5. Vehicle No. TN 22 AT 9888.



1. I submit this letter to you to reconsider and review my case on real facts. I received letter vide ref. 1 cited above on 26.11.2009. The SR. Divisional Manager III has repudiated my insurance claim to my theft vehicle vide ref. 4 cited above which is insured with you vide ref. 3 cited above. I want to bring your kind notice the following reply on real facts for your kind perusal and reconsider my case.


2. I state that with regard to the SR. Divisional Manager III statement in the said ref. 1 cited above “There has been delay of one month in reporting the theft to the police.” I have reported the said occurrence on 06.04.2009 itself. The police received the complaint and orally enquired about the said incident. I narrated the incident to them as follows “The Car Park is a Service centre and I used to leave my vehicle there for repairs. On 04.04.2009 at 4.30 PM, as usual I have taken my vehicle there to replace some shock observer. Since I knew the owner of the car park well, I have casually told my intention and my willingness during our discussion that if any party comes for good price, I am ready to sell my car. Then I was asked to leave the car in front of his workshop since there was no place inside the workshop and I did accordingly. I was told on 06.04.2009 morning that my car was stolen by some unknown person. We both searched the car here and there with sincere efforts and our efforts were put in vein”.

3. I State that the Inspector of Police, crime branch Villivakkam Police station one Muniasamy demanded the workshop owner if he gives a complaint that will be very much useful to him for further investigation. After receiving a complaint from him, he promised to file F.I.R after getting necessary instruction from his higher ups. Then the police inspector tendered many excuses for his inability to meet his Assistant Commissioner, Villivakkam due to his tight schedule of work and did not file the F.I.R.

4. I State that I met Assistant Commissioner, Villivakkam in person regarding the delay in filing F.I.R. After that only the Inspector of Police called the said workshop owner Pravin Jain Kothary and asked him to give some names of the suspects who were visiting his workshop on the previous day of occurrence. In turn Workshop Owner told the said Inspector of police that one of his former labour name one Prabhakar. Immediately the said Inspector asked another complaint from the said Pravin Jain Kothari by including the suspect’s name and again promised to file the F.I.R. with in short period. In the meantime I reported the delay to the higher police officials for not filing the F.I.R.

5. I State that finally on 05.05.2009, the above said Inspector of Police, crime branch Villivakkam Police station registered an F.I.R in Cr.No.246 of 2009 u/s.406 I.P.C. I was given the said F.I.R. copy after two days. I got surprise and shock and reported the said matter to the Assistant Commissioner, Villivakkam that the said Inspector of police registered the complaint in wrong section of 406 I.P.C. instead of Theft case under section 379 I.P.C. in order to avoid the embracement from his higher officials and then the F.I.R was altered on 20.05.2009 as theft case u/s.379 I.P.C. instead of U/s.406 I.P.C and not included the section 379 I.P.C. with existing section 406 I.P.C.. Hence this is strictly a case of theft and not a case of Criminal breach of trust and also the delay of one month to file the F.I.R. and the Registration of F.I.R. is not my mistake. The police altered the F.I.R. and also informed to the concerned Learned XIIIth Metropolitan Judicial Magistrate, Egmore. This was clearly stated in the report submitted to the Magistrate for Alteration in F.I.R. by the Police authorities on 20.05.2009. The said alter F.I.R. Xerox copy was given to me only on my representation dated 27.05.2005 by registered post to the higher officials. The mistake committed by the police authorities should not be put on the heads of the Insured.

6. I state that there was no contract between my self and Car Park Owner at any point of time. I left my car on 04.04.2009 at 04.30.PM for repairs in front of the workshop with the information to the workshop owner.

7. I state that I have not violated at any point circumstances the condition No.5 of the commercial vehicle package policy. I have taken all reasonable steps and left the vehicle with the information to the carriage owner.

8. I state that my insurance policy cited in ref. 3 above is a comprehensive one.

9. I state that The SR. Divisional Manager III has already deputed his investigator. I and the workshop owner narrated all the above said real facts to him and the said work shop owner subsequently submitted an explanation to you in this regard on 13.10.2009.

10. I state that knowing well all the said facts, the SR. Divisional Manager III has claimed Form 35 along with No Objection Certificate from the financiers to process my claim. Since the GMAC financiers demanded to settle the entire balance amount to issue the said Form 35 along with No Objection Certificate. I remitted the entire balance nearly Rs.2.4 Laks amount to the said financiers and submitted the said Form 35 along with No Objection Certificate from the financiers to the SR. Divisional Office III.

11. I state that the further the Sr. Divisional Manager III has demanded to submit the Notarized Letter of Subrogation and Indemnity Bond executed in Non-Judicial Stamp Paper to process my claim after knowing all the above facts. After that at the eleventh hour the SR. Divisional Manager III repudiated my claim with no grounds.

12. I state that the police authorities have submitted their report to the Hon’ble Court stating that the said case is a purely Theft case and not a case of Criminal Breach of Trust. The Court has also disposed the said case accordingly. But the Divisional Manager III has taken the section 406 I.P.C alone though it was already altered and repealed but not consider the section 379 I.P.C. The case has to be decided on the entire facts and not to be decided on the portion of the facts. If the case is decided by taking a portion of facts which are favour to the Insurance Company’s alone, then the justice can not be rendered.


13. I state that the SR. Divisional Manager III has taken decision only based on the section 406 I.P.C of F.I.R. It is only first Information to the Police. The Police submitted a final report to the Hon’ble Court after thorough investigation as it is a purely theft case. But he did not consider the final report of the Police and hence the decision taken by the SR. Divisional Manager III based on the information and not on the final report is not valid before law.

14. I state that even for argument shake, it is accepted that my claim is repudiated under section 406 I.P.C; it is not applicable to my case. Because the said section 406 I.P.C. says “Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, dishonestly misappropriates or converts to his own use that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or willfully suffers any other person so to do, commits "criminal breach of trust". In this case the person has neither entrusted the property nor has committed any mistake either by way of dishonest or misappropriate the said property for his own use. Hence the competent authority misunderstood the section 406 of IPC and it is not applicable in this case in hand. Knowing all the above said facts, the investigating authorities of the police, after thorough investigation, realizing their mistake, they have altered the F.I.R. from Sec406 I.P.C. to 379 I.P.C. and not added the 379 I.P.C. with 406 I.P.C.

15. I state that the police have given the Non Traceable Certificate only u/s 379 I.P.C. and they did not spell anything about the section 406 I.P.C. They are the competent investigating authorities under law. Hence my claim has to be considered on the final report of the Police Investigation.

16. I state that the SR. Divisional Manager III & the competent authority in his letter ref.1 cited above that I have violated the Policy Condition No.5 of the Commercial Vehicle Package Policy for which he has repudiated my claim. Our Hon’ble Apex Court has passed orders in favour of insurer in such similar cases as “in the case of theft of vehicle breach of condition is not germane. The appellant Insurance Company is liable to indemnify the owner of the Vehicle when the insurer has obtained comprehensive policy for the loss caused to the insurer”. Therefore the question does not arise that I have to lodge the complaint against the workshop owner. And hence I am legally eligible for claim.

17. I state that our Hon’ble Apex Court has observed “in a case of theft of vehicle, nature of use of the vehicle can not be looked into and the Insurance Company can not repudiate the claim on that basis” Hence my claim is genuine.

18. I state that I want to bring to your kind notice that the Delhi State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, headed by Justice JD Kapoor, dismissed an appeal filed by New India Insurance Co. stating that “"Even if we accept that somehow or the other the company was not intimated about the change of user (category) or change of ownership, still the claim of the respondent was a rightful claim." But in my case mere leaving the vehicle for repairs in a work shop and requested the workshop owner and stated orally ‘if any person offers for good price I am ready to sell the same’ and is nothing more than that. Therefore my claim is a rightful claim.

19. I state that looking from any corner the repudiation of claim by the Divisional Manager III to the said vehicle vide ref. 4 cited above is not correct.

Therefore I request that the Learned Authority of Grievance cell may be pleased to consider the above facts and take necessary action to cancel the earlier repudiation order issued by the SR. Divisional Manager III & competent authority in his letter No. 500300/Motor OD Claim/RS/sk dated 24.11.2009 and pass orders on the real facts and accept my genuine claim.

Yours
G. Venkatesh Babu



Copy to.

1. The Chairman, Head Office, 3, Midleton Street, Kolkatta.
2. The General Manager, Head Office, 3, Midleton Street, Kolkatta.
3. The Deputy General Manager, The Regional Office, Anna Salai, Chennai.
4. The SR..DIVIL.Manager, Divisional Office - III, 751 Annasalai, Chennai

To, Bhopal.
The Grievance cell,
National Insurance Corporation Limited, 25.05.10
Kolkatta
Dear Sir,

Sub:- Appeal for redressal

This is an appeal for redressal of our grievance with National Insurance regarding claim settlement of our policy no. 320200/11/08/3100000539. We, Shakti Plastics are an small scale industry manufacturing water storage tanks in Mandideep.
On, 18.05.09, when our factory suffered severe damage due to the roof flying-off during a storm, we reported our loss to National Insurance and supplied them with all the required information. Instead of receiving compensation we had to deal with their apathetic approach.
In response to our claim of 1,77,980.00 rupees National Insurance offered us 62,000.00 rupees without giving us any justification and pressurized us to sign a claim settlement voucher in which no amount was mentioned.
Our pleas for a “hearing” were completely ignored and no effort was made to explain their stand in spite of our repeated requests.
We are enclosing herewith a copy of our last letter to National Insurance where-in the whole sequence of events and details of our grievances are mentioned.
As National Insurance Bhopal office chose not to respond to our plea, we are compelled to seek justice by taking our grievance to a higher authority.
Kindly expedite the process of our claim settlement, so that we receive what we rightfully deserve and ensure that the “ Divisional Manager” is penalized for intentionally delaying our claim settlement. Please send one of your senior officer from the grievance cell and grant us a “ hearing” so that justice may prevail .

Thanking You

Yours truly,

For Shakti Plastics



Rajiv Dixit
(Proprietor)

Shakti lastics
Off:- H1 /10, Arvind Vihar, Bagmugalia, Bhopal.
Fact :-Plot no 165, New Industrial Area, Phase II, Mandideep.
Contact: - 0755-3206022, 09300476574, 09300476578
To, Bhopal.
The Divisional Manager, 27.04.2010
National Insurance Corporation Limited,
I, 71- Sewani Tower, Zone- II M.P. Nagar, Bhopal
Ref: - Your letter no. 320200/ claims/ 2010 dated 31.3.10.
Dear Sir,
Sub:- Appeal for redressal.
We regret to inform you that our faith in your Insurance company has been badly shaken by the way in which our case of has been dealt with. The sequence of events, which has led us to feel that your approach has not been “without prejudice” is as follows: -
 On 18.05.2009 the roof of our factory shed got blown away during a storm resulting in severe damage to building, plant, machinery, raw material, & finished goods. As we had bought a policy 320200/ 11/08/3100000539, standard fire & special peril policy offered by National Insurance through Allahabad Bank, we informed the bank about the losses incurred.
To our surprise we found that National insurance had not even submitted a copy of the policy to the bank
 On approaching National Insurance office we were told that since we did not have a copy of the policy we would have to wait.
 It was only on 22.05.2009, that we were provided a copy of the policy & we posted a letter to National Insurance requesting for a surveyor to be sent to the factory premises for the assessment of damage incurred.
 The claim form that was provided to us on 25.05.2009. was dully filled & submitted by us on 26.05.2009, & we received a receipt of the letter of intimation.
 After some days a surveyor was sent to us and he submitted a back dated survey report.
 We undertook repair work in our factory and in a letter dated 11.07.2009 in response to your surveyor query, we submitted an estimate of losses incurred by us to the tune of Rs 1,77,980.00 ( One lac Seventy Seven Thousand Nine Hundred Eighty only) and also provided documents to support the claim.
 On 7.10.2009 we sent a letter of reminder for the settlement of the claim as there had been no response so far in spite of our repeated trips to the National Insurance Office to expedite the process.
 We were in for another unpleasant surprise when the National Insurance sent us by hand a “ Claim Discharge Receipt Voucher” that had been completely filled except for the claim settlement amount and we were asked to sign it. Contd…..

page 2
 As there was no mention of the “amount “ of the claim being discharged, we did not understand the logic behind it. We tried to find out from National Insurance office what the “amount” of claim settlement was. We were further disheartened to know that our claim of Rs 1,77,980 was being settled for Rs 68,000.00 approximately.
 The matter had already been delayed by five months and in an attempt to seek justice we requested for a copy of the surveyor’s report in our letter dated 21.10.2009.
 Our pleas for a copy of the surveyor’s report were ignored and on 29.10.2009, we sent another reminder requesting for the copy of the surveyor’s report under “Right of information”.
 On the same date we sent another letter reminding the National Insurance office that in spite of repeated reminders and countless personal visits to Insurance office we have not received any communication or claim settlement letter so far.
 Another instance worth mentioning in our list of grievances is the fact that in spite of informing the National Insurance office repeatedly that our correspondence should be sent to our office address at Bagmugalia and not to our factory premises, we found that most of the mail continued to be posted to the factory address.
In a letter dated 28.10.2009 ( Which we received much later ) there was mention of a letter dated 6.10.2009 carrying details of the claim amount but in truth we never received any such letter till date. Once again we were pressurized to sign the claim discharge voucher and return it to the National Insurance office, regardless of the fact that the voucher contained no mention of the “amount”.
 After sending a reminder on 30.10.2009 and receiving no response, on 6.11.2009. we again wrote to the National Insurance Office seeking surveyor’s report under “Right of Information”.
 Finally on 6.11.2009 we were provided with a copy of the surveyor’s report and on scrutinizing it we found many discrepancies. We wrote once again, requesting for “audience”, so that we could discuss and clarify the discrepancy in the report.
 Our harassment knew no bounds, when our repeated requests for “audience” ( Letters duly received by your office on 4.3.2010 ; 15.3.2010 ; 6.04.2010.) were completely ignored and a letter dated 31.03.2010. reached us on 18.04.2010. informing us that since we have not submitted the duly signed claim discharge voucher, National Insurance was closing the claim file, making it “NO CLAIM”.

 The above mentioned sequence of event proves that the dealings of National Insurance company are not ethical or without prejudice as they would like us to believe. Contd…..


page 3
Out of all the details mentioned above , we would certainly seek clarification regarding the following: -
1. Pressurising us to sign a claim settlement voucher in which no amount was mention. As far as we understand a receipt is issued against an amount received. We wish to know why we were expected to sign the receipt voucher before receiving or even knowing the amount.
2. Ignoring our request that our mail should be sent to our Bagmugalia address, and not to our factory premises. The last letter we received from National Insurance was dated 31.03.2010. and sent to our factory address where we do not have any responsible personnel to receive important official mail. Although, the aforementioned letter was sent by speed post we received it only on 18.04.2010.
3. Refusing to grant us “audience” in spite of repeated requests. If National Insurance company has acted ethically and “without prejudice” then it should not hesitate to discuss and clarify any misgivings that their client may harbor. We fail to understand this kind of avoidance on the part of National Insurance and believe that we are entitled to seek clarification.
Finally, we request you once again to call us for claim settlement. We assure you that we are only seeking clarification and will be satisfied with reasonable and legitimate settlement of our claim.
On the other hand, If we are met with the same apathy that we have received from National Insurance so far, we shall be forced to believe that you are avoiding genuine claim settlement.
If we don’t hear from you (at our office address ) within 7 days, of the receipt of this letter, we will be forced to take this matter to the higher authorities.
We shall also intimate to the Industrial Association of Mandideep, Madhya Pradesh Laghu Udhyog Sangh, C.I.I. and F.I.I.C.I., regarding the harassment we have suffered and warn other industrialists against any dealings with National Insurance.
We sign off with the hope that you realise that it is your moral and ethical duty to redress the grievances of your customers and not be the cause of their grievance.
Kindly, expedite the redressal of our grievances so that our faith in your insurance company is restored.
Thanking you Yours truly
For Shakti Plastics

Rajiv Dixit
(Proprietor)

Buiness Enhancement Scheme was issued by RO 2 Chandigarh via DO 2 Chandigarh under Maruti Tie Up Business.but finally is not releasing after achieving the said target.

I have a Car Insurance with NATIONAL INSURANCE India. Tata IndiGO CS MAY 2008 Model. I met with an accident on 7th MARCH 2010 and I submitted my claim on 19 th APRIL 2010. the repair estimation has come to Rs. 238387/- ALL PROCEDURES & DOCUMENTS R SUBMITTED TO INSURANCE COMPANY UNDER CASHLESS FACILITY…..20000/- RS DEPOSITED…..BUT TILL TODAY 22 AUGUST….REPAIRING WAS NOT COMPLITED….ACCORDING TO SHOWROOM OWNER TILL ONE MONTH TO GO FOR TOTAL REPAIR……

Dear sir
i am from cuddalore i went to your on 17-02-2011 to put one new 3rd party insurance for my own use fiat sienna diesel car 1999 model so i went to the one man name ksankar who is working in the office he told me the insurance amount will be 3400 rs and that day i met another men in the office he is also an employee is name is subramani he told me it will cost 3300 rs and told me to come tommorow manager will come and he will issue the policy so on 18-02-2011 i went to the office they told me to fill the form i filled it and gave to administrator officer he told me it will cost some extra money or come on monday our manager will come on monday and that same day 18-02-2011 they issued policy to one company for some lorrys and cars of one company they are giving ransome so they are issuing insurance i am not giving ransome they are not issuing me insurance yours company manager is not sitting in the seat in emergency i want to go toa long journey what shall i do and i went to new india insurance and putted a policy without a ransom and it cost me less than your company amount shall i go to the court or give me a solution if you want a proof i can send it to you reply me as soon as possible



thanking you
sharif abdul alim

I have submitted my mediclaim to Safeway TPA services Pvt Limited 6/2 1st Floor Kiriti Nagar Industrial Area New Delhi on 01 Feb 11 an d also submitted their objection reply on 17 Feb 11 then reminder for early payment on 26 Apr 11 but they did not heed on my case. You are requested to look into the matter. Thanking you. mediclaim No ID No 46389 Policy No 360501/48/10/8500000004

Vimal Rai
C-584 Avantika Rohini Sector I
Delhi 85

Non payment of my mediclaim by National Insurance compay Hardhian Singh Road Karol Bagh New Delhi 05

I have submitted my mediclaim to Safeway TPA services Pvt Limited 6/2 1st Floor Kiriti Nagar Industrial Area New Delhi on 01 Feb 11 an d also submitted their objection reply on 17 Feb 11 then reminder for early payment on 26 Apr 11 but they did not heed on my case. You are requested to look into the matter. Thanking you. mediclaim No ID No 46389 Policy No 360501/48/10/8500000004

Vimal Rai
C-584 Avantika Rohini Sector I
Delhi 85

Received a cover note from national insurance company in nov.2010 on behalf provided a chq no.846736 from my account and cleared to the company but today when i checked thru the net i foundthe policy is not visible anywhere..........................

National Insurance Company Limited,. 3 Middleton Street

Kolkata

WestBengal

Pincode : 700071

Telephone : 22831705 /22831706

Fax : 22831712

Email : website.administrator@nic.co.in

To
The Grievance Cell

Sir,

Sub: Death claim- Rejected- The reasons for rejetion shown are based on assumption and not on facts - Request to review the claim application on real facts – reg.


Ref: 1.National insurance co.Ltd. March 31 2011, Letter No.Ref: 250300/Miscl/10-11
2. PAN CARDS LTD. claim application No.ADC/N-275 Date- 11/01/2011
3. Policy No. 250300 42 09 8200001837
4. letter to Sion hospital from Neral police station Outward No. 1243/2010
5. E- mail to pancard@bom3.vsnl.net.in on 3rd Aug.2011



1. I submit this letter to you to reconsider and review my case on real things.
2. As we know Accidental death PMR report was not so easy to get. It is time consuming process. As per the rule, pancard clubs ltd., they were not able accept the incomplete claim form. So we submitted the same as soon we got the PMR report. On 11-01-2011.
3. At the time of death of my husband,I was not in a condition to give followup to this case. As you know sir, that ,In todays scenario, Insurace coverage amount one lakh rupees is comparatively less, but nobody here to look after my 5 yr. old son.
So it is my humble request to settle claim, because this amount will help my child’s career.
4.I hereby attached the necessary documents for your kind consideration.
Thanking you


Yours faithfully

Smt.Harshada Harshal Sawant

National Insurance Company Limited,. 3 Middleton Street

Kolkata

WestBengal

Pincode : 700071

Telephone : 22831705 /22831706

Fax : 22831712

Email : website.administrator@nic.co.in

To
The Grievance Cell

Sir,

Sub: Death claim- Rejected- The reasons for rejetion shown are based on assumption and not on facts - Request to review the claim application on real facts – reg.


Ref: 1.National insurance co.Ltd. March 31 2011, Letter No.Ref: 250300/Miscl/10-11
2. PAN CARDS LTD. claim application No.ADC/N-275 Date- 11/01/2011
3. Policy No. 250300 42 09 8200001837
4. letter to Sion hospital from Neral police station Outward No. 1243/2010
5. E- mail to pancard@bom3.vsnl.net.in on



1. I submit this letter to you to reconsider and review my case on real things.
2. As we know Accidental death PMR report was not so easy to get. It is time consuming process. As per the rule, pancard clubs ltd., they were not able accept the incomplete claim form. So we submitted the same as soon we got the PMR report. On 11-01-2011.
3. At the time of death of my husband,I was not in a condition to give followup to this case. As you know sir, that ,In todays scenario, Insurace coverage amount one lakh rupees is comparatively less, but nobody here to look after my 5 yr. old son.
So it is my humble request to settle claim, because this amount will help my child’s career.
4.I hereby attached the necessary documents for your kind consideration.
Thanking you


Yours faithfully

Smt.Harshada Harshal Sawant

Dear Friends,

I am currently facing a big challenge in recovering my claim money against my Car Policy from the National insurance Company in Panaji(GOA)
my Claim number is 271700/31/11/6100000468. I was suppose to get my claim money of aprox Rs. 10500/- in the month of July which is still not been given to me due to their internal miscommunication. I was told finaly that the cheque is dispatched to me on 5th december by registered post. whcih aparently has not reached my till now. I have personally been to the post office and found out that there is nothing that has been recieved by them. I called up the insurance official Mr. Sameer and asked him to give me the details of the dispatch, to which i was mentioned that they only know that the registerd post is made on the 5th December. They do not have any further document to support this. I fail to understand how does a reputed company (As they call them self) do not have detials of the cheque been dispatched. When i further compalined to them they mentioned to me that the cheque may have lost in transit and hence, i now have to submit an indemnity bond on a Rs. 50/- Non Judicial stamp paper requesting them to transfer money through ECS direcly into my account. I would not recomend any one to go for National insurance Company claims it is the most disgusting Insurance Company that I have come accross with.