Home Did anyone see the TV3 midweek show about insurance 24-11-2011?

Each fought their own vested interest.

Solicitor was not independent as she was working for one of the public loss assessing firms.

Lad who lost shed said that insurers wont pay because they are not satisfied lightening caused the damage. They think it was snow. He said that there was thunder lightening and snow. Still, there should be some bit of lightening damage on the shed. He did not seem to want to arbitrate, so methinks the case is not as clearcut as alleged.

Broker tried to keep a middle course. He is a broker, not an agent and to be fair, most brokers will assist in making a claim. Some have arrangements with public loss assessors who take over.

Journo was weak. She did not seem to have enough technical knowledge.
 
I have been involved in the property claims sector of the insurance industry for over twenty years. In my professional opinion, there were too many inaccurate remarks and assumptions made in that programme.

The majority of that programme was so far off the mark and tainted with vested interests, that for once I am lost for words!!!! To be honest, It was reminiscent of a "Kent Brockman investigates" from a Simpsons episode and carries the same credibility as far as I am concerned.
 
Claimsman said:
I have been involved in the property claims sector of the insurance industry for over twenty years. In my professional opinion, there were too many inaccurate remarks and assumptions made in that programme.

The majority of that programme was so far off the mark and tainted with vested interests, that for once I am lost for words!!!! To be honest, It was reminiscent of a "Kent Brockman investigates" from a Simpsons episode and carries the same credibility as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...

I couldn't have put it better......

Unusual to base such a programme on the specifics of one company? It tended to be very one sided as a result
 
Ravima said:
Lad who lost shed said that insurers wont pay because they are not satisfied lightening caused the damage. They think it was snow. He said that there was thunder lightening and snow. Still, there should be some bit of lightening damage on the shed. He did not seem to want to arbitrate, so methinks the case is not as clearcut as alleged.
Click to expand...

If a person does not win in an arbitration situation they are liable to pay the other parties costs therefore this person could end up paying extremely expensive legal fees.

Ravima said:
Solicitor was not independent as she was working for one of the public loss assessing firms.
Click to expand...

The solicitor in question works for Pro Insurance Claims who deals with these insurance claims on a daily basis.

Ravima said:
Broker tried to keep a middle course. He is a broker, not an agent and to be fair, most brokers will assist in making a claim. Some have arrangements with public loss assessors who take over.
Click to expand...

Yes this is true however this arrangement could complicate the Loss Assessor true loyalties to their customers.

Claimsman said:
I have been involved in the property claims sector of the insurance industry for over twenty years. In my professional opinion, there were too many inaccurate remarks and assumptions made in that programme.

The majority of that programme was so far off the mark and tainted with vested interests, that for once I am lost for words!!!! To be honest, It was reminiscent of a "Kent Brockman investigates" from a Simpsons episode and carries the same credibility as far as I am concerned.
Click to expand...

I would state that your comments are completely naïve. The story and footage that was produced was completely true and if it was not TV3 and Pro Insurance Claims would be leaving themselves open to legal action.

kkelliher said:
I couldn't have put it better......

Unusual to base such a programme on the specifics of one company? It tended to be very one sided as a result
Click to expand...

The Irish Insurance Federation was requested to appear live on this program however decided to put a pre-recorded piece on air. It was their decision.
 
Any chance bobbill could confirm any connections in this case as the loss assessors name is referenced in every other answer

Also for record is it not true that the solicitor on the show actually jointly owns the loss assessors firm? This hardly makes here neutral.

Weather the insurance federation was involved or not does not change the one directional manner if the presentation provided by tv3

The same programme could be slanted in any direction using suitable individual case studies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top