LAHORE: Majority of the industrial insurers failed to obtain insurance claims because of the incompetent and fraudulent nature of the same which prove non-starter, unwarranted and flawed in their scopes at the relevant appellate forums, said sources.

They said the insurers also fail to challenge the exclusion clause of the insurance policy which provides insurance cover for a certain period only if there is no loss during that period. The insurers remain silent despite having a clear-cut knowledge of the same until the loss occurs against the insured machinery, especially in the shape of theft, they added.

It may be noted that the industrial insurers avail insurance cover for their stock and machinery through insurance policies against fire and burglary. It is also worth noting that they prefer to obtain insurance cover for a short period initially due to the factor of high cost, which is extended for another 365 days since the initial cover expires.

Interestingly, the insurers come to know about the theft of equipment and spare parts during shifting and approach the insurance company as well as police to lodge an FIR.

The appointment of surveyors by the company leads to submission of burglary claim form. However, the surveyors do not recommend indemnification on the pretext that the loss claimed by the insurers cannot be considered as an event of burglary, as the coverage under the insurance policy had not commenced at the time of event on the one hand and breach of various policy terms, conditions and warranties on the other.

Accordingly, the insurance company turns down the claim lodge d by the insurers.

The sources further pointed out that the industrial insurers also commit a serious mistake of producing their directors as witnesses despite being the beneficiaries of the insurance. Instead, said the sources, the insurers should produce an independent witness to establish factum of the burglary and consequent loss.

Similarly, they fail to challenge the survey report before the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) under the relevant rules and prefer to raise objections at the level of appellate forums, which proves a futile exercise.

In nutshell, they said, the claimants fail to demonstrate due care in handling the insurance policies. In some cases, they said, even the insurers concede in their evidence that there is a possibility that the guards deputed at the site were absent due to Eid holidays on the fateful day.

Resultantly, the claim of insurers is bracketed as incompetent and fraudulent in its nature when the claimant could not identify how the burglary was committed against the machinery lying at conspicuous place in the premises of the factory.

Copyright Business Recorder, 2023