BR100 Decreased By (-0.46%)
BR30 Decreased By (-0.81%)
KSE100 Decreased By (-0.41%)
KSE30 Decreased By (-0.4%)
AGHA 6.64 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.45%)
BECO 4.39 Increased By ▲ 0.04 (0.92%)
BML 55.50 Decreased By ▼ -0.67 (-1.19%)
BOP 29.97 Decreased By ▼ -0.15 (-0.5%)
CNERGY 12.81 Decreased By ▼ -0.17 (-1.31%)
CSIL 5.21 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-1.88%)
FCCL 51.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.55 (-1.06%)
FFL 14.35 Decreased By ▼ -0.14 (-0.97%)
FNEL 1.21 No Change ▼ 0.00 (0%)
KEL 6.01 Decreased By ▼ -0.05 (-0.83%)
KOSM 5.57 Decreased By ▼ -0.27 (-4.62%)
LOTCHEM 26.11 Decreased By ▼ -0.06 (-0.23%)
MLCF 88.90 Decreased By ▼ -2.33 (-2.55%)
NBP 162.68 Decreased By ▼ -1.51 (-0.92%)
NCPL 52.20 Decreased By ▼ -0.98 (-1.84%)
NPL 57.75 Decreased By ▼ -1.37 (-2.32%)
OGDC 313.29 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-0.03%)
PACE 9.69 Decreased By ▼ -0.08 (-0.82%)
PAEL 34.95 Decreased By ▼ -0.29 (-0.82%)
PIBTL 14.48 Decreased By ▼ -0.23 (-1.56%)
PPL 218.97 Decreased By ▼ -2.39 (-1.08%)
PRL 91.33 Increased By ▲ 0.11 (0.12%)
PTC 59.20 Increased By ▲ 0.01 (0.02%)
SSGC 23.10 Decreased By ▼ -0.20 (-0.86%)
TBL 8.65 Decreased By ▼ -0.10 (-1.14%)
TELE 7.44 Decreased By ▼ -0.17 (-2.23%)
TPL 21.31 Decreased By ▼ -0.72 (-3.27%)
TPLP 11.89 Decreased By ▼ -0.67 (-5.33%)
TREET 21.70 Decreased By ▼ -0.03 (-0.14%)
TRG 55.21 Decreased By ▼ -0.58 (-1.04%)

LAHORE: An insurance company has declined to pay depreciated value of a stolen vehicle.

According to details, the insurer had insured his long vehicle with the insurance company through a leading company against Rs35,60,000/- on annual premium of Rs1,06,800/-. The insurer approached the insurance company when owner of the vehicle failed to contact driver of the vehicle, followed by police report.

The owner of the vehicle claimed for payment of insured amount as the incident of missing of the vehicle was claimed to have been covered under the policy if insurance inked between the parties.

The insurance company flatly denied the claim, which led to the change of stance of the owner of the vehicle urging for payment of the depreciated value of his stolen vehicle.

The insurance company refused to entertain it on the ground that the vehicle had not been stolen from him; rather he had himself handed it over to his driver who misappropriated the vehicle, which was not covered under the policy. Also, conduct of the owner of the vehicle suggested that the vehicle was concealed somewhere with his consent and the claim was based on a mere police report. There was no proper FIR so that the matter could have been properly investigated for retrieval if the vehicle.

The company also doubted the claim on the ground that the owner had not made any effort for retrieval of the vehicle and preferred to lodge a claim. The insurance company also objected to the claim application filed three months after the date of disappearance of the vehicle.

The owner had also not taken any action against the driver, which was against normal human conduct. He had also not having the address of the driver, as he had not obtained CNIC at the time of employing him for the vehicle.

He had no idea about the name of the father of the driver. His sole response was that he had trust over the driver, which was breached. The insurance company declined to entertain the insurance claim.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2025

Comments

Comments are closed for this article.