I am closing my LinkedIn account.
Why?
To open another one later!
Sounds funny but that's what I'm doing, and here's why.
Closing my LinkedIn account
1. Unauthorised access to my email contact list.
Although there are means to switch it off, once shaken, twice shy.
2. Spammy Invites.
The "invites", as I found out later, didn't really come from the person but from robots -- the other party's contacts were also being mined!
3. Spammy Emails.
LinkedIn has good articles coming through the emails.
But mostly, it's all spam head-hunting and invites.
Does Preferences to stop spam even work?
4. Active Connection
I killed all.
Yet there's just this one stubborn active connection that I couldn't seem to kill.
In the first place, I never even requested connection.
5. Time management
Time management in this case call for a full delete of the account.
For all of the above issues, there are instruction on how to prevent them from happening via preferred settings. But settings consumes time, especially when it doesn't work as well.
Then you have to write in to Customer Service.
The hack and the hassle!
LinkedIn takes time to manage if there are data you don't want let loose.
Pronto.
Out it goes.
6. Professional Identity
The folks who should know the value of my work already have access through my preferred choice of communication.
I may not necessarily want every one I meet to know what I do for a living.
As long as my data is "out there", I just don't feel secure, no matter what the currently provided privacy settings may be.
7. A New Me
All in all, let's just say that the person (and all the accompanying lifestyles and en·trails that comes with it) that first open the LinkedIn account (that I am closing now), is today, an entirely different person.
The new me has shed the old me.
The new me's a better me.
So why have reminders of the old me?
8. Tools and its Appropriate Use
To me, tools are meant to be used to your advantage.
The day when tools starts taking advantage of you — that's wakey wakey up time.
I need to be comfortable and secure in the tool I use.
The price I pay to avail of services - in terms of security or time - has become too high.
Time to part ways.
Update:
Viola!
As soon as I hit "Close The Account" --
a while plethora of options came up!
Now I can hide my profile, and do a lot of settings that makes for a viable option to closing it completely (in case you need it back someday or for temporary purposes).
LinkedIn should make this setting more accessible - not only when someone hits the close account tab.
Hopefully, I need not write in to LinkedIn to shut of the auto-link to my gmail contacts that shoots automated invites to them. Some members have had to do that previously, but hopefully, LinkedIn has rectified that.
Opening another LinkedIn account
Yes, I am closing one account to open another new one.
The old one reveals too much of me.
The new one will have safeguards in place - a new identity that allows me to know that is going on without revealing anything about me.
LinkedIn remains a useful resource that puts many professional profiles at your fingertips. I've been able to communicate with VIPs who otherwise will not respond via other means.
At times, this is also the only way we can find out if an old acquaintance has move on to a new position.
If you are in the market for business or a career, this is also one essential tool that helps you tap into.
The changes are working for the moment.
With the safeguard of an alter-identity, LinkedIn can spam all they want.
I'll just take what's useful, and leave the rest.
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
Tuesday, August 23, 2016
Singapore PM Lee out of Qi during National Day speech
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong is on a week of medical leave after he had a sudden vasovagal attack hours into his rally address.
PM Lee's expression turned blank after he trembled and swayed, shocking the live audience at the ITE auditorium, as well as those watching the rally live from home.
Unlike the dramatic headlines that claims that he collapsed on stage, he never suffered a fall. As he faltered at the podium, Defence Minister Dr. Ng Eng Hen sprinted like a cheetah to provide a supporting armlock, guiding the PM offstage. Singapore is in good hands with such a speedy Defence Minister around. Speaking of speed, it is time to reduce the length of National Service to one year, as under such good hands plus availing of the rapid technological advances of this age, the Army should now be ready to churn out operational readiness in the enlisted men and officers in half the time it had required during the past decades.
The Prime Minister Office offered the explanation that the PM felt unsteady because of prolonged standing, heat and dehydration, and ruled out stroke or heart attack.
Indeed, after an hour and a half, to a sounding applause, PM Lee returned to finish off the rally.
Though modern medicine frowns on it, there are traditional wisdom in recognizing the internal strength that is derived from balancing the flow of qi, which can be depleted. PM Lee has definitely run low on Qi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qi) that day, due to a strenuous prolonged schedules.
We hope he will be back to peak form, and after this episode, do look into the strenuously long run of National Servicemen as well.
PM Lee's expression turned blank after he trembled and swayed, shocking the live audience at the ITE auditorium, as well as those watching the rally live from home.
Unlike the dramatic headlines that claims that he collapsed on stage, he never suffered a fall. As he faltered at the podium, Defence Minister Dr. Ng Eng Hen sprinted like a cheetah to provide a supporting armlock, guiding the PM offstage. Singapore is in good hands with such a speedy Defence Minister around. Speaking of speed, it is time to reduce the length of National Service to one year, as under such good hands plus availing of the rapid technological advances of this age, the Army should now be ready to churn out operational readiness in the enlisted men and officers in half the time it had required during the past decades.
 |
| Photo Credits: Straits Times |
The Prime Minister Office offered the explanation that the PM felt unsteady because of prolonged standing, heat and dehydration, and ruled out stroke or heart attack.
Indeed, after an hour and a half, to a sounding applause, PM Lee returned to finish off the rally.
Though modern medicine frowns on it, there are traditional wisdom in recognizing the internal strength that is derived from balancing the flow of qi, which can be depleted. PM Lee has definitely run low on Qi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qi) that day, due to a strenuous prolonged schedules.
We hope he will be back to peak form, and after this episode, do look into the strenuously long run of National Servicemen as well.
Monday, July 25, 2016
Buying a TV
Significant upgrades in hardware by LG, Samsung and Sony in 2016's line-ups means we ought to study the reviews closely to check out the differentiation across a wide range.
We didn't realise that at first - how fast things had been moving in the manufacturing world of smart TV.
Out of convenience and laziness, we simply proceeded to the mega stores - Best Denki, Courts, Gain City, Harvey Norman, Mega Discount Store, Mustafa, Parisilk - to check out the TV displays.
Wow, the sales reps sure swim around us like sharks, swooping in even before we could even lay eyes properly on any unit. Competition for sales target is apparently keen since we notice the same sale rep tailing us even though we mentioned that we were not buying - just to gain browsing time, and they probably suspect that too.
Finally, one rep gain control over the others, and before we know it, he had demo'ed to us the pros and cons of every brand across the stores.
In the end, the deal didn't go through as he turned sour when we discover the model he proposed was already replaced with a new model that is soon to come.
Fast forward to the new model's arrival.
We were merely checking out the display when there you have it - one rep swooped in again.
We asked for the actual price (which is never the tagged price), and he as good as take that to mean we are his customer already.
This sales rep claims to have given us the lowest bargain basement rate, which we very quickly found out through googling that it isn't. He admitted that it is our job to source out the lower price, then only would he go down one level to the next in price decrease. So began the rather tedious process of bargaining, which is time-consuming since their best deals are often trumped by savvy HDB shop outlets out for a bite at the I.T. pie. But price matching helps reduce the quotation tremendously.
Due to his persistance, we ended up placing a deposit for a brand we hadn't consider in the first place.
By chance, we found ourselves in the showroom of our preferred brand. We found out that his store's unit of the TV we actually wanted, somehow had its settings tweaked to deter sales. As a result, using the same USB stick of pre-downloaded movies doesn't help. At the official showroom, we were blown away by the superiority of the unit, which had earlier given a rather poor showing at the mega store. It is actually quite important for manufacturers to have their own showroom, or to send their own calibrators to all stores, to avoid the same scenario where settings are dampened unethically by their own dealers, out to steer customers to brands that provide the store better profits, and their sales fellas better commission.
Out of courtesy, we SMS the sales rep to inform that we are cancelling the order in favour of our preferred brand, and for a model that is due to arrive in the coming quarter.
We then proceeded to the store to obtain our refund, which was duly granted after some verification was made.
In the midst of the refund, we suddenly got a call from the sale rep, which we couldn't pick up as we were attended to by the cashier and there was a long and impatient queue behind us. After signing on the refund to finalise it, a flurry of SMS came from the sale rep, stating that there is no such thing as refund on deposit. We have to go down to him and buy something else with the deposit.
That was a shocker. The TV was not in limited stock situation so we had not deprived any customers. The only reason we placed a deposit was he told us we can cancel anytime. No installment plan. No delivery effected. No freebies received yet. We never even receive any invoice.
Gain City has a 8-day cooling period published on its website, which would have prevented their sales rep from having their own ruling. Although this mega store does not publish its stance on refund of deposits, it was willing to allow the same fair practice.
We are lucky then, that we had already managed to get the store to refund us the deposit, ironically because our SMS to the sales rep didn't reached him. If not for the delay in the SMS facility, he is bound to have the refund halted using similar aggressive tactics he applied to effect the sale.
There could have been many future purchases for him, but he ruled out any such possibility himself by not treating us like long-term customers. Merely something for him to hit and run. Ownself rule out ownself, is how some would put it.
We are now quits, of course.
Aren't we glad!
While helpful in driving the price down to match the other quotations, his sales tactic veers on the aggressive side, with reasons such as saying his management would have a bad impression of him if we made him push down the rate then did not go through with the sale, or he needed the sales target badly. It was all about him. Customers are just tools of the trade.
When he thought he had clinched our sale, he went round the store walking like a peacock pointing us out to his colleagues. It felt really funny to be treated like trophies.
We should have taken flight just from his way of transposing his uh-huh uh-huh so impatiently before you could even formulate the sentence. We were expressing our concerns about the unit's performance and about having to pay too large an amount of deposit. That uh-huh uh-huh was another clear sign he was bored already, just foot out the loot and get the sales over and done with willya?
We got way-laid by sales talk, but glad we didn't get side-tracked in the end.
It would have deprived us of years of appreciation for the TV we are soon to buy.
As always is the case with poor customer service, we don't want the product to be associated with the image of bad representation that stays with us whenever we use the product.
We didn't realise that at first - how fast things had been moving in the manufacturing world of smart TV.
Out of convenience and laziness, we simply proceeded to the mega stores - Best Denki, Courts, Gain City, Harvey Norman, Mega Discount Store, Mustafa, Parisilk - to check out the TV displays.
Wow, the sales reps sure swim around us like sharks, swooping in even before we could even lay eyes properly on any unit. Competition for sales target is apparently keen since we notice the same sale rep tailing us even though we mentioned that we were not buying - just to gain browsing time, and they probably suspect that too.
Finally, one rep gain control over the others, and before we know it, he had demo'ed to us the pros and cons of every brand across the stores.
In the end, the deal didn't go through as he turned sour when we discover the model he proposed was already replaced with a new model that is soon to come.
Fast forward to the new model's arrival.
We were merely checking out the display when there you have it - one rep swooped in again.
We asked for the actual price (which is never the tagged price), and he as good as take that to mean we are his customer already.
This sales rep claims to have given us the lowest bargain basement rate, which we very quickly found out through googling that it isn't. He admitted that it is our job to source out the lower price, then only would he go down one level to the next in price decrease. So began the rather tedious process of bargaining, which is time-consuming since their best deals are often trumped by savvy HDB shop outlets out for a bite at the I.T. pie. But price matching helps reduce the quotation tremendously.
Due to his persistance, we ended up placing a deposit for a brand we hadn't consider in the first place.
By chance, we found ourselves in the showroom of our preferred brand. We found out that his store's unit of the TV we actually wanted, somehow had its settings tweaked to deter sales. As a result, using the same USB stick of pre-downloaded movies doesn't help. At the official showroom, we were blown away by the superiority of the unit, which had earlier given a rather poor showing at the mega store. It is actually quite important for manufacturers to have their own showroom, or to send their own calibrators to all stores, to avoid the same scenario where settings are dampened unethically by their own dealers, out to steer customers to brands that provide the store better profits, and their sales fellas better commission.
Out of courtesy, we SMS the sales rep to inform that we are cancelling the order in favour of our preferred brand, and for a model that is due to arrive in the coming quarter.
We then proceeded to the store to obtain our refund, which was duly granted after some verification was made.
In the midst of the refund, we suddenly got a call from the sale rep, which we couldn't pick up as we were attended to by the cashier and there was a long and impatient queue behind us. After signing on the refund to finalise it, a flurry of SMS came from the sale rep, stating that there is no such thing as refund on deposit. We have to go down to him and buy something else with the deposit.
That was a shocker. The TV was not in limited stock situation so we had not deprived any customers. The only reason we placed a deposit was he told us we can cancel anytime. No installment plan. No delivery effected. No freebies received yet. We never even receive any invoice.
Gain City has a 8-day cooling period published on its website, which would have prevented their sales rep from having their own ruling. Although this mega store does not publish its stance on refund of deposits, it was willing to allow the same fair practice.
We are lucky then, that we had already managed to get the store to refund us the deposit, ironically because our SMS to the sales rep didn't reached him. If not for the delay in the SMS facility, he is bound to have the refund halted using similar aggressive tactics he applied to effect the sale.
There could have been many future purchases for him, but he ruled out any such possibility himself by not treating us like long-term customers. Merely something for him to hit and run. Ownself rule out ownself, is how some would put it.
We are now quits, of course.
Aren't we glad!
While helpful in driving the price down to match the other quotations, his sales tactic veers on the aggressive side, with reasons such as saying his management would have a bad impression of him if we made him push down the rate then did not go through with the sale, or he needed the sales target badly. It was all about him. Customers are just tools of the trade.
When he thought he had clinched our sale, he went round the store walking like a peacock pointing us out to his colleagues. It felt really funny to be treated like trophies.
We should have taken flight just from his way of transposing his uh-huh uh-huh so impatiently before you could even formulate the sentence. We were expressing our concerns about the unit's performance and about having to pay too large an amount of deposit. That uh-huh uh-huh was another clear sign he was bored already, just foot out the loot and get the sales over and done with willya?
We got way-laid by sales talk, but glad we didn't get side-tracked in the end.
It would have deprived us of years of appreciation for the TV we are soon to buy.
As always is the case with poor customer service, we don't want the product to be associated with the image of bad representation that stays with us whenever we use the product.
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
Restaurant Name-Twister
It's always sad to hear of the closure of a restaurant.
In this case, however, we're rather glad that Fung Ding Hung Restaurant has ceased operations since December 2015, so that henceforth, there won't be a repeat of the confusion we encountered.
While checking on the outlets that American Express Platinum was tied up with, American Express Customer Service lady merrily told us that their card will get special discounts at "Din Tai Fung" restaurant.
We were so happy!
After a merry go-round where we were unable to get confirmation from Din Tai Fung directly, it appears that she had gotten confused. It was "Fung Ding Hung" and not "Din Tai Fung" that American Express was tied up with for dining discounts.
Aigoo aigoo!
Make us happy for nothing.
In this case, however, we're rather glad that Fung Ding Hung Restaurant has ceased operations since December 2015, so that henceforth, there won't be a repeat of the confusion we encountered.
While checking on the outlets that American Express Platinum was tied up with, American Express Customer Service lady merrily told us that their card will get special discounts at "Din Tai Fung" restaurant.
We were so happy!
After a merry go-round where we were unable to get confirmation from Din Tai Fung directly, it appears that she had gotten confused. It was "Fung Ding Hung" and not "Din Tai Fung" that American Express was tied up with for dining discounts.
Aigoo aigoo!
Make us happy for nothing.
Thursday, December 24, 2015
Reminder: Update Your CPF Nomination
Finally, the official reply as to why CPF monies not covered by a Will....
....it should have been in the CPF website's FAQ in the first place....
Why CPF monies, share of HDB flats not automatically covered by a willPublished
Dec 24, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
We thank Mr Francis Cheng for his feedback ("Let CPF monies, share of HDB flats be covered by a will"; Dec 12).
Mr Cheng suggested reviewing the Central Provident Fund Act so that CPF monies can be covered by a will, and standardising the manner of holding of HDB flats so that owners can specify in their will how their interest in the flat can be distributed.
First, CPF monies are not meant to be part of a CPF member's estate. This has the advantage of not subjecting the member's CPF savings to his debts upon his death.
This is to protect the member's CPF monies and ensure that the member's dependants receive the monies. Moreover, if CPF monies are distributed according to a will, any disputes arising from the existence and validity of the will may delay the receipt of the CPF monies by the dependants.
It is, therefore, in the interests of both members and their dependants for un-nominated CPF monies to be distributed by a public agency outside of the member's estate, in accordance with intestacy laws.
If the CPF member wants his CPF monies to be distributed in accordance with a will, the member can make a nomination of the same beneficiaries as those under the will. Upon the member's death, the CPF Board will pay the CPF monies to the nominees directly.
Most CPF members who have died had earlier made a nomination, and we continue to encourage members to make a nomination in their lifetime.
Second, on standardising the manner of holding of HDB flats, Mr Cheng has rightly pointed out that the law allows co-owners of HDB flats to hold their property as either joint tenants or as tenants-in-common. This provides flat owners the flexibility to choose the manner of holding of their flat, based on their individual needs and circumstances.
If they would like their interest in the flat to be automatically transferred to their joint tenants, they can opt for joint tenancy.
On the other hand, if they prefer to make a will to specify how their interest in the flat will be distributed, they can opt for tenancy-in-common.
Standardising the ownership would result in flat owners no longer having a choice in the manner of holding of their flat.
Shaun Goh
Director
Income Security Policy Division
Ministry of Manpower
Lim Lea Lea (Ms)
Director (Branch Operations)
Housing and Development Board
◘
Such info should have a permanent place in the FAQs, and then prominent advisories be rendered on a frequent basis as a reminder. Until now, much of it had been left to public speculation or for the individual to seek answers on their own....
Let CPF monies, share of HDB flats be covered by a will
Published
Dec 12, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
The Ministry of Law and Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board stated that the CPF Act does not recognise wills, and that the distribution of CPF monies must be by official nomination ("CPF monies not covered by a will"; Wednesday).
However, the rationale for this policy was not explained. Elderly and illiterate CPF members may not understand or know the procedures on the distribution of CPF monies upon their death.
The authorities should review the CPF Act and streamline it so that CPF monies can be part of the deceased's estate and covered by his will. This is to make it less of a hassle for his beneficiaries; after all, a will is a legal document.
There is a similar conundrum with HDB flats. If the flat was purchased under joint tenancy, the share of the flat belonging to the dead man automatically goes to the other joint tenants, regardless of whether the dead man left a will.
If the flat was purchased under tenancy-in-common, the dead man's share of the flat will be distributed according to his will or intestacy laws.
What are the reasons behind these different policies?
Tenants can change their flat ownership from joint tenancy to tenancy-in-common if all parties agree. But some owners may not wish to alert the other co-owners on the change, to avoid animosity.
To provide more flexibility to flat owners on how they want their assets distributed, the HDB should standardise ownership of flats to just tenancy-in-common agreements.
Owners can then specify in their will how their share of the flat will be distributed, say, after the death of the other co-owner or if the surviving co-owner sells the flat.
Francis Cheng
....it should have been in the CPF website's FAQ in the first place....
Why CPF monies, share of HDB flats not automatically covered by a willPublished
Dec 24, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
We thank Mr Francis Cheng for his feedback ("Let CPF monies, share of HDB flats be covered by a will"; Dec 12).
Mr Cheng suggested reviewing the Central Provident Fund Act so that CPF monies can be covered by a will, and standardising the manner of holding of HDB flats so that owners can specify in their will how their interest in the flat can be distributed.
First, CPF monies are not meant to be part of a CPF member's estate. This has the advantage of not subjecting the member's CPF savings to his debts upon his death.
This is to protect the member's CPF monies and ensure that the member's dependants receive the monies. Moreover, if CPF monies are distributed according to a will, any disputes arising from the existence and validity of the will may delay the receipt of the CPF monies by the dependants.
It is, therefore, in the interests of both members and their dependants for un-nominated CPF monies to be distributed by a public agency outside of the member's estate, in accordance with intestacy laws.
If the CPF member wants his CPF monies to be distributed in accordance with a will, the member can make a nomination of the same beneficiaries as those under the will. Upon the member's death, the CPF Board will pay the CPF monies to the nominees directly.
Most CPF members who have died had earlier made a nomination, and we continue to encourage members to make a nomination in their lifetime.
Second, on standardising the manner of holding of HDB flats, Mr Cheng has rightly pointed out that the law allows co-owners of HDB flats to hold their property as either joint tenants or as tenants-in-common. This provides flat owners the flexibility to choose the manner of holding of their flat, based on their individual needs and circumstances.
If they would like their interest in the flat to be automatically transferred to their joint tenants, they can opt for joint tenancy.
On the other hand, if they prefer to make a will to specify how their interest in the flat will be distributed, they can opt for tenancy-in-common.
Standardising the ownership would result in flat owners no longer having a choice in the manner of holding of their flat.
Shaun Goh
Director
Income Security Policy Division
Ministry of Manpower
Lim Lea Lea (Ms)
Director (Branch Operations)
Housing and Development Board
◘
Such info should have a permanent place in the FAQs, and then prominent advisories be rendered on a frequent basis as a reminder. Until now, much of it had been left to public speculation or for the individual to seek answers on their own....
Let CPF monies, share of HDB flats be covered by a will
Published
Dec 12, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
The Ministry of Law and Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board stated that the CPF Act does not recognise wills, and that the distribution of CPF monies must be by official nomination ("CPF monies not covered by a will"; Wednesday).
However, the rationale for this policy was not explained. Elderly and illiterate CPF members may not understand or know the procedures on the distribution of CPF monies upon their death.
The authorities should review the CPF Act and streamline it so that CPF monies can be part of the deceased's estate and covered by his will. This is to make it less of a hassle for his beneficiaries; after all, a will is a legal document.
There is a similar conundrum with HDB flats. If the flat was purchased under joint tenancy, the share of the flat belonging to the dead man automatically goes to the other joint tenants, regardless of whether the dead man left a will.
If the flat was purchased under tenancy-in-common, the dead man's share of the flat will be distributed according to his will or intestacy laws.
What are the reasons behind these different policies?
Tenants can change their flat ownership from joint tenancy to tenancy-in-common if all parties agree. But some owners may not wish to alert the other co-owners on the change, to avoid animosity.
To provide more flexibility to flat owners on how they want their assets distributed, the HDB should standardise ownership of flats to just tenancy-in-common agreements.
Owners can then specify in their will how their share of the flat will be distributed, say, after the death of the other co-owner or if the surviving co-owner sells the flat.
Francis Cheng
Tuesday, November 17, 2015
Car Insurance
High time the authorities do something.
Car Owners' grief, as reflected in Letters to Straits Times -
||
Must insurer pay out claim if vehicle is not damaged?
Published Nov 4, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
I agree with Mr Kenneth Kong Kitson ("Greater transparency needed in motor insurance claims"; Oct 27).
I was in a similar situation when my car just "touched" the rear bumper of another car.
As there was no damage to either vehicle, I apologised to the other driver and assumed that everything was over and we would each go on our way.
To my surprise, I received a letter from my insurer NTUC Income that a claim had been made against me by the other party for $7,895.95.
I felt that the other party was trying to inflate the costs. So I disputed the amount and submitted photos to prove that there was no damage to the two vehicles.
Income sent me a second letter stating that it had negotiated a settlement with the claimant, and that my no-claim discount would be reduced.
My motor insurance premium would also be loaded as I had been blacklisted as a bad risk.
Must insurance companies pay out in damages even when there is no sign of damage to the other vehicle?
Is an insurance claim warranted when a vehicle merely "touches" another vehicle?
Such payouts are pushing premiums up.
Consumers need to know that insurance companies can be trusted and that they are working for their customers' interests.
Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye
||
Zero tolerance for fraudulent, inflated claims
Published Nov 6, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
Mr Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye asked why NTUC Income paid out a third-party claim in an accident he deemed to be extremely minor ("Must insurer pay out claim if vehicle is not damaged?"; Wednesday).
We agree with Mr Lauw that the initial demand of almost $8,000 from the other driver involved in the accident was excessive.
That was why we negotiated for a much lower amount, including legal fees and miscellaneous charges.
We spoke to Mr Lauw and received his consent before we settled the claim in June last year.
With the claim settlement, Mr Lauw's no-claim discount (NCD) was reduced by 30 per cent.
The details of the NCD are stated clearly in the motor insurance contract, and is a standard practice among all motor insurers.
Regarding Mr Lauw's assertion that his insurance premium would be loaded, he was, in fact, offered a renewal of his motor insurance at the standard premium rate.
It is also untrue that Mr Lauw was "blacklisted as a bad risk" as it is not the practice of NTUC Income to blacklist any motorist due to bad claims experience.
Claiming against another party in a road accident is a civil claim that typically involves costly and time-consuming legal proceedings.
We advise motorists to make road safety their top priority when they are driving.
In the unfortunate event of an accident, it is advisable to settle minor accidents amicably.
For more serious accidents, they should contact their insurers immediately, or as soon as it is safe to do so.
NTUC Income policyholders can engage the help of our Orange Force riders to render assistance at the accident scene.
Under no circumstances should motorists allow their vehicles to be taken away by unknown parties.
Finally, NTUC Income has zero tolerance for fraudulent or inflated claims.
Any suspicious claim will be thoroughly investigated and referred to the authorities once we have sufficient evidence.
Over the years, a number of these cases have been prosecuted in court.
Peh Chee Keong
Vice-President
Motor Insurance
NTUC Income
||
Why was claim paid out when car was not damaged?
Published Nov 16, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
I thank NTUC Income's Mr Peh Chee Keong for his reply ("Zero tolerance for fraudulent, inflated claims"; Nov 6). But a few points bear clarification.
First, I did not willingly agree to any payout, as I was trying to prevent Income from paying out a possibly fraudulent claim. But I was told that if I did not agree to its proposed settlement amount, I would have to represent myself in court to take up the case further.
Not wanting to take over the case myself, I had no choice but to agree with whatever payout Income had decided on.
Second, Mr Peh said I was offered a motor insurance renewal at the standard premium rate.
Before the accident, my insurance premium was $800, but after the accident, it went up to $1,400, even after the 20 per cent no-claim discount (NCD).
I have tried to obtain quotes from various other insurance companies, but was told that since a claim had been made against me, there will be a loading on my future premiums. Does that not make me "blacklisted as a bad risk"?
As the accident was very minor, I did try negotiating with the other party, as I did not want to lose my 50 per cent NCD, but the other party was very unreasonable and wanted an exorbitant amount from me.
From the very outset, I had informed Income many times that the other party would be trying to inflate the claim.
I submitted photos taken after the accident, which supported my contention that there was no damage to both vehicles.
Moreover, how could my vehicle have caused so much damage to the other party's vehicle if there was no damage to mine to warrant any insurance claim?
I appreciate Mr Peh's stand of zero tolerance for fraudulent claims but he still did not address my question: Must insurers pay out claims even if a vehicle is not damaged?
The insurer would not have disagreed with me if it had reviewed the photos I sent them.
Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye
||
Insurers shouldn't pay out claims too readily
Published Nov 17, 2015, 7:06 pm SGT
A few years ago, I experienced an incident similar to Mr Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye's ("Why was claim paid out when car was not damaged?"; Nov 16).
A bigger car reversed into my car and damaged the left rear door which was subsequently replaced.
The other owner, a younger man, apologised to me and suggested that we settle our own repairs without claiming from our insurance policies.
His car was hardly damaged as its spare tyre was mounted externally, at the rear.
I claimed from my insurance company while the other owner engaged a lawyer to make a claim against me.
My insurance company's claims executive called me to inform me that the insurer had agreed to the payout to the other party even after my explanation.
The reason that many claims are paid out by insurance companies is very simple: They do not want to spend money on costly litigation. Any payout can be recovered from clients' increased premiums over the next few years.
Lim Jit Chaing
Car Owners' grief, as reflected in Letters to Straits Times -
||
Must insurer pay out claim if vehicle is not damaged?
Published Nov 4, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
I agree with Mr Kenneth Kong Kitson ("Greater transparency needed in motor insurance claims"; Oct 27).
I was in a similar situation when my car just "touched" the rear bumper of another car.
As there was no damage to either vehicle, I apologised to the other driver and assumed that everything was over and we would each go on our way.
To my surprise, I received a letter from my insurer NTUC Income that a claim had been made against me by the other party for $7,895.95.
I felt that the other party was trying to inflate the costs. So I disputed the amount and submitted photos to prove that there was no damage to the two vehicles.
Income sent me a second letter stating that it had negotiated a settlement with the claimant, and that my no-claim discount would be reduced.
My motor insurance premium would also be loaded as I had been blacklisted as a bad risk.
Must insurance companies pay out in damages even when there is no sign of damage to the other vehicle?
Is an insurance claim warranted when a vehicle merely "touches" another vehicle?
Such payouts are pushing premiums up.
Consumers need to know that insurance companies can be trusted and that they are working for their customers' interests.
Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye
||
Zero tolerance for fraudulent, inflated claims
Published Nov 6, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
Mr Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye asked why NTUC Income paid out a third-party claim in an accident he deemed to be extremely minor ("Must insurer pay out claim if vehicle is not damaged?"; Wednesday).
We agree with Mr Lauw that the initial demand of almost $8,000 from the other driver involved in the accident was excessive.
That was why we negotiated for a much lower amount, including legal fees and miscellaneous charges.
We spoke to Mr Lauw and received his consent before we settled the claim in June last year.
With the claim settlement, Mr Lauw's no-claim discount (NCD) was reduced by 30 per cent.
The details of the NCD are stated clearly in the motor insurance contract, and is a standard practice among all motor insurers.
Regarding Mr Lauw's assertion that his insurance premium would be loaded, he was, in fact, offered a renewal of his motor insurance at the standard premium rate.
It is also untrue that Mr Lauw was "blacklisted as a bad risk" as it is not the practice of NTUC Income to blacklist any motorist due to bad claims experience.
Claiming against another party in a road accident is a civil claim that typically involves costly and time-consuming legal proceedings.
We advise motorists to make road safety their top priority when they are driving.
In the unfortunate event of an accident, it is advisable to settle minor accidents amicably.
For more serious accidents, they should contact their insurers immediately, or as soon as it is safe to do so.
NTUC Income policyholders can engage the help of our Orange Force riders to render assistance at the accident scene.
Under no circumstances should motorists allow their vehicles to be taken away by unknown parties.
Finally, NTUC Income has zero tolerance for fraudulent or inflated claims.
Any suspicious claim will be thoroughly investigated and referred to the authorities once we have sufficient evidence.
Over the years, a number of these cases have been prosecuted in court.
Peh Chee Keong
Vice-President
Motor Insurance
NTUC Income
||
Why was claim paid out when car was not damaged?
Published Nov 16, 2015, 5:00 am SGT
I thank NTUC Income's Mr Peh Chee Keong for his reply ("Zero tolerance for fraudulent, inflated claims"; Nov 6). But a few points bear clarification.
First, I did not willingly agree to any payout, as I was trying to prevent Income from paying out a possibly fraudulent claim. But I was told that if I did not agree to its proposed settlement amount, I would have to represent myself in court to take up the case further.
Not wanting to take over the case myself, I had no choice but to agree with whatever payout Income had decided on.
Second, Mr Peh said I was offered a motor insurance renewal at the standard premium rate.
Before the accident, my insurance premium was $800, but after the accident, it went up to $1,400, even after the 20 per cent no-claim discount (NCD).
I have tried to obtain quotes from various other insurance companies, but was told that since a claim had been made against me, there will be a loading on my future premiums. Does that not make me "blacklisted as a bad risk"?
As the accident was very minor, I did try negotiating with the other party, as I did not want to lose my 50 per cent NCD, but the other party was very unreasonable and wanted an exorbitant amount from me.
From the very outset, I had informed Income many times that the other party would be trying to inflate the claim.
I submitted photos taken after the accident, which supported my contention that there was no damage to both vehicles.
Moreover, how could my vehicle have caused so much damage to the other party's vehicle if there was no damage to mine to warrant any insurance claim?
I appreciate Mr Peh's stand of zero tolerance for fraudulent claims but he still did not address my question: Must insurers pay out claims even if a vehicle is not damaged?
The insurer would not have disagreed with me if it had reviewed the photos I sent them.
Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye
||
Insurers shouldn't pay out claims too readily
Published Nov 17, 2015, 7:06 pm SGT
A few years ago, I experienced an incident similar to Mr Jimmy Lauw Thian Chye's ("Why was claim paid out when car was not damaged?"; Nov 16).
A bigger car reversed into my car and damaged the left rear door which was subsequently replaced.
The other owner, a younger man, apologised to me and suggested that we settle our own repairs without claiming from our insurance policies.
His car was hardly damaged as its spare tyre was mounted externally, at the rear.
I claimed from my insurance company while the other owner engaged a lawyer to make a claim against me.
My insurance company's claims executive called me to inform me that the insurer had agreed to the payout to the other party even after my explanation.
The reason that many claims are paid out by insurance companies is very simple: They do not want to spend money on costly litigation. Any payout can be recovered from clients' increased premiums over the next few years.
Lim Jit Chaing
Friday, October 16, 2015
Mr Tharman and the Jurong Hand-Severing Lift Incident
Exactly what we were thinking, and it takes a brave minister to say it:
"There’s nothing to hide, there must have been something wrong with the lift even if maintenance checks were done,” Mr Tharman told reporters after visiting Mdm Khoo Bee Hua, 85, at the National University Hospital.
There must have been something wrong, so we have to take responsibility. We will wait for the authorised examiner to do an independent report and then make sure on the basis of the report that this never happens again.” — Jurong GRC Member of Parliament and Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam
Source: Today http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/jurong-town-council-take-responsibility-lift-accident-tharman?sc_customer=952c9467-31d3-4f90-83b8-e9fd114f4f78&sc_src=email&sc_llid=27205&sc_lid=33987208&sc_uid=19xVRsbQ0Q
Wish we had Mr Tharman as our MP when our Ama was beaten up while under observation for dementia at a local hospital in Singapore.
Hospital had tried to cover up; we had lost faith in our district MP; and when we tried to contact the Health Minister, and then the Home Minister for help with housing so the family can stay closer to look after her, we were blocked by the staff.
Ever since then, we realize that in spite of the niceties presented in the media, we are in effect truly on our own when problem arises.
Below are some pics from the 2010 incident which left us, and our Ama severely traumatised, and in perpetual fear thereafter (she was lucid on and off despite dementia)....
Our poor, poor Ama — beaten in the very place we thought would keep her safe....
Till this day, we cry at the thought of it.
Ama was 85 years old at the time of incident.
Her body took a major hit from the beating that arises from the negligence of the Singapore hospital.
The perpetrators brought her down to her knees....
Other parts of her body were whacked too, but as the pictures were too graphic, it will not be shown.
When such a thing happens, we really, truly, are on our own.
"There’s nothing to hide, there must have been something wrong with the lift even if maintenance checks were done,” Mr Tharman told reporters after visiting Mdm Khoo Bee Hua, 85, at the National University Hospital.
There must have been something wrong, so we have to take responsibility. We will wait for the authorised examiner to do an independent report and then make sure on the basis of the report that this never happens again.” — Jurong GRC Member of Parliament and Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam
Source: Today http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/jurong-town-council-take-responsibility-lift-accident-tharman?sc_customer=952c9467-31d3-4f90-83b8-e9fd114f4f78&sc_src=email&sc_llid=27205&sc_lid=33987208&sc_uid=19xVRsbQ0Q
Wish we had Mr Tharman as our MP when our Ama was beaten up while under observation for dementia at a local hospital in Singapore.
Hospital had tried to cover up; we had lost faith in our district MP; and when we tried to contact the Health Minister, and then the Home Minister for help with housing so the family can stay closer to look after her, we were blocked by the staff.
Ever since then, we realize that in spite of the niceties presented in the media, we are in effect truly on our own when problem arises.
Below are some pics from the 2010 incident which left us, and our Ama severely traumatised, and in perpetual fear thereafter (she was lucid on and off despite dementia)....
Our poor, poor Ama — beaten in the very place we thought would keep her safe....
Till this day, we cry at the thought of it.
 |
| Ball formation on hand due to being plucked off shoulder. |
Ama was 85 years old at the time of incident.
Her body took a major hit from the beating that arises from the negligence of the Singapore hospital.
 |
| Physical injury is visible. The trauma that lives on is unseen. |
The perpetrators brought her down to her knees....
 |
| The knee area suffers excruciating pain when busted.... |
Other parts of her body were whacked too, but as the pictures were too graphic, it will not be shown.
When such a thing happens, we really, truly, are on our own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)