Cedric Stephens, Contributor

Question: I had a single vehicle accident in July 2006. The repairer told me to report it to my insurers. His estimate amounted to $413,000. The adjuster revised it to $503,390. A cheque in the sum of $251,750 was delivered to the repairer on October 25 to buy the parts. Two months later, the car was not repaired. There was evidence of dishonesty.

Some parts that should have been changed were not replaced. In other cases, genuine parts were switched for inferior parts. I did not sign the satisfaction note. I took possession of the vehicle in April 2007. My insurers are telling me that the repairer has to complete the job. I do not want to have anything else to do with that man. Can I get someone else to complete the repairs?

- GA, Spanish Town

Answer: Your near two-year ordeal with a repairer - who is obviously a thief masquerading as a tradesman - and the bunch of idiots at an insurance company drove me into action. I phoned the owner of the company that sold you motor insurance before I wrote one word. I asked him to help you to put this claim behind you. He agreed. You now know how to contact him.

Case for article

Your case is being used for this article for three reasons. The person with whom I spoke is very passionate about how insurance is practised. It should keep the promises it makes. The rules by which it is run should be fair to buyers and sellers.

He also feels that insurers, agents and brokers are not doing enough to train their employees.

Ignorance, like interest rates, has a compounding effect. Lack of know-how on the part of employees, especially those who deal with claims, gives insurance a bad name. Those are his words - well, almost. I could not have said that any better.

An insurer's duty to a customer is not subject to the whims and fancy of employees in its claims department or the loss adjuster. It should be based on what the contract (policy) says.

When I discuss your case in the context of what your policy says, I hope that it will help others avoid the problems you have faced with what ought to have been a very simple claim.

What is an insurer's duty when a vehicle is insured against accidental damage? The insurer must: (a) pay to have the vehicle repaired or (b) replace it, if it is lost, stolen or damaged and is uneconomic to repair or (c) pay the cash equivalent of any loss or damage.

The aim is to restore the insured to the same financial position after the loss that he or she was in before the loss.

Fair settlement

The insured should not profit by the damage. Neither should that person be in a worse position after the loss. These are the rules that should have guided the settlement of your claim. Bear in mind also that delays in obtaining parts are excluded by the contract.

Some of your problems could have been avoided if you had selected a repairer with a reputation for honesty. You made a big mistake. That does not, however, give the insurer any right to crucify you.

They should work with you to put things right in order to honour their promise. To say that the 'fly-by-night' repairer should be allowed to complete the job he dawdled over for nearly six months makes no sense whatsoever - either for you or for them.

The value of the car has, I believe, fallen quite sharply since the accident in its partly repaired state.

Also, it is unlikely that the remaining $251,640 from the 2006 estimate will be sufficient to return your car to its pre-accident condition. Your first order of business is to find a competent and honest repairer. Show him the original estimate. Ask him to examine your vehicle. Get a new estimate based on prices today. Ask the person that I spoke with about your claim to try and negotiate a compromise settlement based on the average of the estimates for 2006 and 2008 or some other combination.

The delay in settlement benefited the insurer since it can be argued that they earned and continue to earn interest on the unpaid balance all of these months.

The insurer should also be asked to investigate ways - at their expense - to put the squeeze on 'Mr Fly-by-Night'. He should, at the very least, be prevented from getting any more repair jobs that are paid for by insurance companies. At best, he should be put behind bars.

Cedric E. Stephens provides free, independent information and advice about risk and insurance. Email: aegis@cwjamaica.com