Showing posts with label Advantage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Advantage. Show all posts

Thursday, January 22, 2015

Advantage settles accident claim

With Claudienne Edwards

Sunday, January 18, 2015    

Dear Claudienne,

I am writing on behalf of my brother.

On August 26, 2014, I was travelling with him in his motor vehicle, when we were hit by another car. On the date of the accident the driver of the other vehicle accepted responsibility for the accident in the presence of police officers who arrived on the scene.

My brother’s vehicle is a 2007 Mitsubishi Pajero and he is insured with Advantage General. The car that hit his vehicle was also insured with Advantage.

My brother submitted a claim within the time specified by the insurance company along with all the required documents.

After two months, during which time he made numerous telephone calls to the insurance company, he was advised that his vehicle would be written off as a loss. However, Advantage told him that he would not be paid the amount of money that the vehicle was insured for, as the valuator had overvalued the vehicle by $700,000.

This was despite the fact that the insurance company had accepted the valuation and had given him a premium based on this valuation. My brother had paid the premium in full. The valuator recommended by Advantage had valued the vehicle for J$2,850,000.

My brother told the insurance company that the settlement proposal was unacceptable as the vehicle valuation for J$2,850,000 had been done on July 16, 2014, approximately six weeks prior to the accident, by the loss adjustor company recommended by them.

He has been trying without success to have this matter settled. Every week when he calls the company it is the same response: “We are still processing the claim; call us back next week.”

It has been very hard, as he lives in Trelawny and works in Savanna-la-Mar. To date (December 9, 2014) the insurance company has only agreed to pay for car rental service for four weeks.

Is there anything that you can do to assist him in getting his claim processed? We would be forever grateful.

FC

Dear FC,

After receiving your e-mail dated December 9, 2014, we contacted the claims manager at Advantage General. She informed Tell Claudienne that she had never spoken to your brother but was aware that settlement options had been communicated to him under cover letter dated November 11, 2014. She also said that your brother had retained the services of a lawyer and that the company “would prefer not to provide any further information until our negotiations with the attorney have been concluded”.

Tell Claudienne contacted your brother, who pointed out that although his attorney wrote to the insurance company on November 20, 2014, they had not responded to the letter up to the time you wrote to us on December 9, 2014.

Your brother sent us a copy of the letter he received from the insurance company.

Pertaining to the settlement the letter stated the following:

“Please be advised that the assessor…. provided a market value of $2,150,000; we are aware that a valuation was done by…… on July 3, 2014 with a value of $2,850.000 given by them.

“In light of the above we would consider one of two options:

“(1) Averaging the original sum insured and pre-accident values which would amount to $2,500,000. The value of the salvage (residual value of the vehicle) is $650,000 and this amount will be deducted from the settlement offer. The settlement also is subjected to the deduction of a policy excess which is three per cent of the pre-accident value.

“(2) Settling on the pre-accident value and recalculate the premium using a value of $2,150,000 and will refund the difference in premium which amounts to $7,632.21. The value of the salvage (residual value of the vehicle is $650,000 and this amount will be deducted from the settlement offer). The settlement is subjected to the deduction of a policy excess which is three per cent of the pre-accident value.

“Kindly let us have your decision at which time we will provide further documentation and requests as it relates to the settlement.”

After your brother sent Tell Claudienne a copy of the settlement proposals he received from the insurance company on December 17, 2014, we informed the claims manager that we would be asking her via e-mail to clarify why it had taken the insurance company a protracted period to respond to the letter from the lawyer urging them to accept the initial valuation which Advantage said was done on July 3, 2014 for J$2,850,000.

The lawyer’s letter dated November 20, 2014 to Advantage had stated: “We strongly urge you to accept the initial valuation by…… and request that the full J$2,850,000 be used to calculate any settlement in this matter.”

On the same day, December 17, at 3:49 pm Tell Claudiene received an e-mail from you and your brother advising us that the insurance company in a letter to the lawyer earlier that day, December 17, 2014, made a “new proposal”. The insurance company accepted the initial valuation of $2,850,000 and agreed to use this figure to calculate the settlement of your brother’s claim.

The letter to your brother’s lawyer apologised for the “delayed response”. The letter stated the following:

“Further to telephone conversation between (the lawyer) of even date wherein you were informed that our settlement decision as outlined in our letter dated November 11, 2014 was on the principle of indemnity. However, further review of SM’s policy has revealed that his policy is an Agreed Value policy, which means that any offer of settlement should be done using the sum insured afforded by the policy.

In light of the above, our revised settlement offer is outlined below: Sum insured $2,850,000, less salvage $650,000 equal $2,200,000, less excess $85,500 equal $2,114,500.”

Tell Claudienne asked the claims manager of the insurance company to clarify why in the proposed settlement letter dated November 11, 2014 to your brother the principle of indemnity was not mentioned.

We also asked her to explain the meaning of the principle of indemnity.

We received the following response from the claims manager:

“The principle of indemnity was not mentioned in our letter dated November 11, 2014 to SM as we were responding directly to an e-mail that he had sent.

“As requested, attached is an extract of the Advantage General’s Motor Vehicle Policy Booklet which has the definition of ‘indemnity’.

“Trusting that you will find our response adequate.”

Advantage General’s Motor Vehicle Policy Booklet states that indemnity means “Compensation which is sufficient to put the insured in the same financial position after the loss as he was in immediately before the loss took place. The measure of indemnity in the event of a Total Loss/Constructive Total Loss will be based on the market value or insured’s estimate of value, whichever is less.”

Insured’s estimate of value means “The sum for which the vehicle is covered. It is the maximum amount payable by the company for loss or damage to the vehicle and the sum to which the Excess will apply.”

We note that your brother has now received a cheque from Advantage General in settlement of the money owed. We see that he is pleased that the sum he received was calculated on the basis of the $2,850,000 that his vehicle had been insured for.

Good luck.

Have a problem with a store, utility, a company? Telephone 936-9436 or write to: Tell Claudienne c/o Sunday Finance, Jamaica Observer, 40-42 1/2 Beechwood Avenue, Kingston 5; or e-mail: edwardsc@jamaicaobserver.com. Please include a contact phone number.


View the original article here



Advantage settles accident claim

Tuesday, July 23, 2013

Jamaica hold slender advantage

JAMAICA took a narrow first innings advantage against Guyana yesterday, but a second innings collapse left the hosts with a small lead of 58 runs and a mere five wickets in hand in the West Indies Under-15 third-round two-day match at the Treasure Beach Sports Complex.

Jamaica batted first, but could only manage a total of 99, despite Kirk McKenzie’s 31, and captain Brad Barnes’ knock of 27. Guyana seamer Ronaldo Mohamed took 5-28, while spinner Richie Luknauth finished with 2-11.Scores: Jamaica 99 (35.3 overs) and 54-5 (30 overs); Guyana 95-9 (38 overs).In reply, Guyana’s batsmen also struggled as they were restricted to 95-9 in 38 overs. Raymond Perez top-scored with 19 against the spin-bowling pair of Barnes and Ian Spence, who took 3-19 and 3-25, respectively.At the close of day one, the hosts laboured to 54-5, as Ashmead Ned took 2-11.In another round three encounter, Trinidad & Tobago were on the brink of victory against cellar team Leeward Islands at the Manley Horne Park.Scores: Leeward Islands 78 (29.2 overs) and 49-6 (20 overs); Trinidad & Tobago 157 (41.4 overs).The Leewards took first strike and were dismissed for 78, as Jerelouis Lewis provided the lone resistance with 24 not out.Trinidad’s seam bowlers Joel Sutherland and Sachin Seecharan took 3-5 and 3-16, respectively, while another pacer Amrit Kistow, ended with 2-18.In reply, Trinidad & Tobago posted a commanding 157, thanks to Saiba Batoosingh’s top score of 70. Trevor Hanley led the bowling for the Leeward Islands with 5-45.Batting a second time, Leewards were floundering on 49-6 when play ended.Seecharan has taken 3-15 in the second innings.At the St Elizabeth Technical High School playfield, the Windward Islands wrested first innings advantage from title-holders Barbados.Scores: Barbados 121 (33.2 overs) and 46-3 (25 overs); Windward Islands 146 (40.4 overs).Windwards dismissed Barbados for 121 as Alick Anthanaze took 4-31, and Shane Roberts grabbed 2-20.In their response, the Windwards marched to 146 thanks to Nick Elibox’s 49, and Johnell Eugene 44. Kemar Burrowes finished with 5-39 for Barbados.Batting a second time, Barbados closed on 46-3.

HOUSE RULES


1. We welcome reader comments on the top stories of the day. Some comments may be republished on the website or in the newspaper – email addresses will not be published.


2. Please understand that comments are moderated and it is not always possible to publish all that have been submitted. We will, however, try to publish comments that are representative of all received.


3. We ask that comments are civil and free of libellous or hateful material. Also please stick to the topic under discussion.


4. Please do not write in block capitals since this makes your comment hard to read.


5. Please don’t use the comments to advertise. However, our advertising department can be more than accommodating if emailed:mailto:advertising@jamaicaobserver.com.


6. If readers wish to report offensive comments, suggest a correction or share a story then please email: community@jamaicaobserver.com.


7. Lastly, read our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy

comments powered by

View the original article here



Jamaica hold slender advantage

Root hammers home advantage for England

LONDON, United Kingdom (AFP) — Joe Root’s unbeaten 178 left Australia needing to make cricket history if they were to prevent England going 2-0 up with three to play in the Ashes.

England were 333 for five in their second innings, a colossal lead of 566 runs, at stumps on the third day of the second Test at Lord’s yesterday.Root’s century, the second of his eight-match Test career, was exactly the kind of large or ‘daddy hundred’ so beloved of England batting coach and former Test opener Graham Gooch.Ashes-holders England lost just two wickets in a near-ideal day for the hosts and, with so much time left in the match, the lack of a declaration from captain Alastair Cook was no surprise.Long before yesterday’s close, Australia, bowled out for just 128 on Friday, needed to surpass the world record fourth innings winning total of 418 for seven made by the West Indies against them at St John’s in 2002/03 if they were to cause a stunning upset.This was the 22-year-old Root’s first Test hundred as an opener after the Yorkshireman made 104 against New Zealand on his Headingley home ground in May.That century, in a match in which then Test opener Nick Compton struggled, persuaded England to promote Root to the top of the order, where he bats for Yorkshire.The selectors’ confidence in Root was justified by an innings spanning 110 overs and nearly eight hours at the crease that was a lesson in Test-match batting to Australia’s fallible top order.Importantly, Root was not fazed by watching England collapse to 30 for three on Friday as Peter Siddle’s treble strike gave Australia a glimmer of hope.“Last night was tough. They bowled exceptionally well and we knew we were going to have to scrap for a bit and earn the right to score runs later in the day,” Root told BBC Radio’s Test Match Special.“I knew how hammering it home was important.”Together with Yorkshire colleague Tim Bresnan, who made an admirable 38 as nightwatchman, he put on 99 before sharing a fifth-wicket stand of 153 with first-innings century-maker Ian Bell (74).Jonny Bairstow, another Yorkshireman, was 11 not out at stumps after helping Root add an unbroken 51 for the sixth wicket.England, 1-0 up in the five-match series after last week’s 14-run victory at Trent Bridge, resumed yesterday on 31 for three, already 264 runs in front.England’s Joe Root plays a shot off the bowling of Australia’s Peter Siddle during day three of the second Ashes Test match held at Lord’s cricket ground in London, yesterday. (PHOTO: AP)

View the original article here



Root hammers home advantage for England

Friday, June 28, 2013

St Lucia seeking to take advantage of PetroCaribe

Business

Friday, June 28, 2013

CASTRIES, St Lucia – St Lucia will seek to advance arrangements to access Venezuelan oil under the PetroCaribe initiative when Prime Minister Kenny Anthony visits Nicaragua today.Anthony told reporters Wednesday that there were no grounds for speculation that the island may have abandoned efforts to get oil on concessionary terms from Venezuela.Under PetroCaribe, Caribbean countries benefit from preferential rates on crude oil, refined products, and LPG or its energy equivalent, from Venezuela. The payment arrangement allows for purchase of oil on market value for 40 per cent up front, within 90 days. The remainder of the payment can be made over a period of 25 years with one per cent interest, provided that oil prices are above US$40 per barrel.The oil pact was launched in 2005 and was aimed at strengthening the member countries of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of America (ALBA). But there have been reports here that since the death of President Hugo Chavez in March, the PetroCaribe oil agreement appeared to be in limbo.Prime Minister Anthony said his visit to Nicaragua is intended to further St Lucia’s interest in the initiative to which it has become a signatory.“We will be meeting essentially to finalise legal arrangement underpinning Petro Caribe which require us to establish two companies.“One would be owned by the government of St Lucia that will conduct its business on the initiative and the other owned jointly with Venezuelan interests, will manage the resources that comes available through PetroCaribe.“So we are moving to put the institutional arrangements in place so that hopefully we can begin to operationalise our relationship and secure benefits from Petro Caribe,” Anthony added.St Lucia became the newest member of PetroCaribe against the backdrop of escalating cost of fuel and the adverse effects on the economy.The government has said that PetroCaribe benefits will be used to invest in social development programmes and the country’s social infrastructure, as has been done successfully in neighbouring Caribbean countries.Among the regional countries that signed on to the deal, Jamaica has stated that since the inception of the facility in 2005, the country has benefited to the tune of US$2.4 billion, and has paid back US$150 million.However, the CEO of Jamaica’s PetroCaribe Development Fund (PDF) said in April that the country was the only beneficiary which had insulated from the temptation to consume the benefits in current expenditure, and had invested it in a way to ensure that the country would be able to meet the payments when they become due.— CMCANTHONY…we are moving to put the institutional arrangements in place

View the original article here



St Lucia seeking to take advantage of PetroCaribe