Jump to content

Distraught parents of law student accident victim turn to media after insurance company refuses to pay


webfact

Recommended Posts

3pm.jpg

Picture: Sanook

 

Sanook reported that the parents of a 21 year old woman - a fourth year law student at Rajaphat Buriram University in the north east of Thailand - turned to them after she was killed in a road traffic accident.

 

Ying, 21, was riding home on a motorcycle when a woman in a Mercedes Benz hit her from behind. 

 

Clutching her daughter's picture in tears her mother Somret, 56, said her daughter loved her and all their hopes and dreams were snuffed out in an instant. 

 

Her daughter had hoped to become a prosecutor. 

 

Her father Somchai said that their daughter died after being rushed to Krasang Hospital. The accident happened on May 1st.

 

The female driver of the car told them that she admitted to negligent driving and gave them 100,000 baht for funeral expenses saying that her First Class insurance would handle compensation payments.

 

Krasang police proceeded to take the matter to court where negligent driving was confirmed and after the intervention of the Office of Insurance Commission the insurance company involved was told to pay 2.5 million baht within seven days from September 15th. 

 

But they have received nothing and now the insurance company is saying they won't pay up because they consider that the Benz driver was not at fault of negligence. 

 

They have told the family to take them to court if they want the money.

 

The family are desperate facing mounting debts and have no idea how to proceed and have begged someone with legal knowledge to help them. 

 

Visa-compliant insurance plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m

 

 

asean_now_BB.jpg

-- © Copyright  ASEAN NOW 2021-11-18

 

Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

 
Get your business in front of millions of customers who read ASEAN NOW with an interest in Thailand every month - email [email protected] for more information
  • Sad 10
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Krasang police proceeded to take the matter to court where negligent driving was confirmed and after the intervention of the Office of Insurance Commission the insurance company involved was told to pay 2.5 million baht within seven days from September 15th. 

 

But they have received nothing and now the insurance company is saying they won't pay up because they consider that the Benz driver was not at fault of negligence. 

this paragraph is very vague.

 

if the defendant was sentenced to pay 2.5 million, then the court should seize assets until their sale nets the awarded sum.

 

but I have problems to understand the involvement of the insurance commission and "was told to pay".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Reigntax said:

It’s easy. The Court confirmed the Merc driver was negligent causing death.

The Court was hearing a neg driving charge and awarded an amount against the driver, not their insurance company.

The Merc driver is responsible for the awarded amount and whether the insurance coughs up is a matter between the driver and their insurance co.

that's what would have happened in a Western court...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tonray said:

Yep...that's the insurance industry... the sales pitch: "We'll always be there for you"....the reality: "take us to court we have hundreds of lawyers"

Right, i mean we have a constant stream of articles about insurance not paying out. We get reminded about it every day that they only take premiums and then don't pay out. Millions of claims but none get paid out because they want to be taken to court.

 

I love it how people always seem to use this to bad mouth insurance, while in reality its only a small portion of the time that there are problems and quite often the insurance is in the right. 

 

This is not the case here as it has been taken to court already so this is one of those examples where it goes wrong. But in reality this a minority. I have not had claims refuted yet from health my health insurance, nor has my car insurance refused to pay 600k bt when the wife totaled the car.  

 

The reality is insurance will almost always pay out but there are cases that you get in trouble. Just like in most industries the majority goes well and incidents go to the newspaper helping to confirm the bias of of some people.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Father took me to see his buddy from WW2 who ran an insurance company when I turned 14 and needed motorcycle insurance.

Was told "Do not lie to #1 the Gov't and #2 the Insurance company.

Sound advice

Without more info this case - for or against - is impossible to judge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, tgw said:

that's what would have happened in a Western court...

 

Yes. Due to the potential liability the insurance co should take over the legal defence on behalf of their client. 
while this appears to be a shut and closed case due to admission of guilt, by admitting fault, the driver may have created their own problem resulting in the Insurance Co not prepared to cover the liability.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, seedy said:

My Father took me to see his buddy from WW2 who ran an insurance company when I turned 14 and needed motorcycle insurance.

Was told "Do not lie to #1 the Gov't and #2 the Insurance company.

Sound advice

Without more info this case - for or against - is impossible to judge.

True however seems that a court judged that it was negligent driving. So them refusing to pay makes no sense unless they go to a higher court, otherwise they need to pay. Its a bit strange but like you said without more details its hard to know more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, tonray said:

Yep...that's the insurance industry... the sales pitch: "We'll always be there for you"....the reality: "take us to court we have hundreds of lawyers"

the fact of the matter is she doesn't have to take them to court. All she needs to do is advise the court where it was ruled that the insurance company had to pay, and the court should ( I emphasise should ) take all the necessary legal actions to enforce the insurance payment, and then prosecute the insurance company & it's directors from contempt of court.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The insurance company knows that the family cannot afford up front legal fees to go into a court battle thus they have the upper hand I would guess that as soon as a court case is proposed they will capitulate and offer to pay the money but not the legal fees the family have paid to bring it to court.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Reigntax said:

The Merc driver is responsible for the awarded amount and whether the insurance coughs up is a matter between the driver and their insurance co.

Absolutely correct and if what's been reported is correct, the parents should have no problem with obtaining a successful verdict against the driver for non-payment.  I'm pretty sure that a decent lawyer will advise them to increase the amount claimed due to the additional distress caused by the insured not paying what the court ordered.

 

Faced with that, the insurance company will no doubt try to do a u-turn and offer the amount originally ordered - if it was me, I would tell them where they can stick their offer and continue through to court.

Edited by KhaoYai
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, webfact said:

The family are desperate facing mounting debts

It's often only about getting the money, not about justice, and this appears to be another example. Tragic that they lost their daughter, but now they are trying to milk the situation for the wrong reasons - that they are in debt. Perhaps if the daughter was alive they'd be hounding her for money instead.

Having said that, the court has made a ruling and assets should be seized to get the sum awarded. Taking the Mercedes would be a good place to start.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, tgw said:

that's what would have happened in a Western court...

Actually, the Thai courts work in the same way in such matters.

 

In 2011 I was injured in an accident with a taxi in Bangkok. The taxi driver was clearly responsible for the accident but UNBELIEVABLY only had 3rd class insurance (the police told me there was no obligation on him to have better cover!).  The maximum amount his insurers covered was 100,000 baht - that didn't even cover my hospital bill, let alone anything else.

 

My lawyers told me not to worry, we would take the driver to court and if he had no money, floowing a successful verdict, the court would order the sale of any property that he, or bizarrely, his family owned in order to cover my claim.

 

As it happened, this guy was just an ordinary man who shared the taxi via shifts with 2 other drivers. He worked away from home in Bangkok in order to support his family (I checked this out).  I decided not to pursue any further claims and settled for the 100,000 as I didn't want to be responsible for either the driver or his family losing their home. In my opinion the Thai government were as much to blame as the driver was for allowing a taxi to operate with 3rd class insurance.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

They possibly are in debt - debts through paying their daughter though university!!! What do you know of their position that gives you the right to say they are 'milking the situation'?

 

In addition, there is little other recompense that anyone can seek in such circumstances - should the Mercedes drives get off scott free and continue her clearly privileged life whilst they grieve?

You forgot to include in my quote that I said they should seize assets to get the money that the court awarded. Naughty. Are you a tabloid writer, by chance, only telling half a story to suit your own agenda?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TigerandDog said:

the fact of the matter is she doesn't have to take them to court. All she needs to do is advise the court where it was ruled that the insurance company had to pay, and the court should ( I emphasise should ) take all the necessary legal actions to enforce the insurance payment, and then prosecute the insurance company & it's directors from contempt of court.

The court didn’t make an award against the insurance company.

it made an award against the Merc driver.

Courts don’t take legal action. They judge on merit, law and facts the action taken by one party against another 

Edited by Reigntax
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...