Teacher Joanathan Lock Wins Case

last SG · 2007-10-04T11:08:20+00:00

"I have myself been played out by NTUC Insurance" - what did they do to you?

Ponders SG

Yes i am aware they can repudiate.

But doing so on technicalities.... is a cheap move.

It not about we being uneducated, but about how protected (or not) we are.

Say I got into an accident and lost my limb, and my insurance company said that they are not paying me because my Road Tax disc is on the right side of the windscreen and hence the car was in an "illegal state" during the accident.

I would feel damn pissed.

We are just saying, the law isn't protecting the victim enough and insurance companies with all their resources and easily muscle out themselves.

If you notice some developed countries have laws specifically protecting parties of a Motor Vehicle accident, that insurance companies can ONLY repudiate liability IF the insured was drunk driving, involved in a crime, fleeing from police, etc.

ORIGAMIST SG

yes I know.. I can sue. But I need to engage a lawyer and look at what happen to Mr Lock ... I cannot afford that kind of money.... we do not enage lawyer very often, so how are we to know the lawyer is not out to fleece us !! ... last time must report to police and then we claims from insurance... thing were fairly ok except that the police say they are blogged down with such paper work that they decided that otherwise ... for their convenience, the people have to suffer lor ... this is SINGAPORE !!! Evil or Very Mad

ORIGAMIST SG

after all these I decided to call my lawyers to check the progress ... they say they receives the photos I sent them and will proceed to check with the other party .. then I asked how much are we claiming them, they told me only the access and the loss of use of car.. I asked them " what about the repair to my car ?". " oh that one, you are to check with your insurance !" ..

Wah lau .... after so long then they tell me I have to check with my insurer !!! What the [email protected]#$ !!!!!!!!!

ilangobi SG

To those who were personally involved: now’s the best time to write to the straits times forum and raise this issue. You won’t have a better chance than this!

allentyb SG

Rolling Eyes

Mr lock has to be blame partially for this long running court case, insurance company are not lazy, put it this way, even you report the case to insurance company, they will either ask you whether do you want to claim in your policy or claim against the other party, i believe he must have told NTUC, it is not his fault, he wanted to claim against the other party, as a result,

first an examiner will look at this case, wait for survey report, and then determine , imagine every single day, there are reports coming in.

Mr lock should have settle the case long time ago, i am disgusted by that mr lock behaviour, he should have settle the case with the insurer, for those who never work in a claims department before, i don't think you understand how much paperwork is involved in a single claim, he is more worried about his ncb, THATS WHY, he doesn't want to settle this case earlier on.

i spit on this guy

allentyb SG

that lock will be black listed by many insurance company, this guy is nothing more than a troublemaker, and such a small amount of money, he wants to engage a lawyer in the first place, he is nothing more than a moron, he could settle with insurance company instead of making a ho ha matter out of it, it is not even matter of life and death, or someone is dead from the accident.

Ponders SG

Would you like to be in Mr Lock's shoe?

allentyb SG

look, in the first place, the repair fee is so little, i would have settle this thing long time ago, instead of dragging it for so long, i work in AIG, one of the biggest motor insurance company, in claims department, i have seen worse case before, this sort of case, should have never reach court of appeal at all, so that mr lock must be a greedy man, that he wants to prolong this case for so long, i don't understand the rational behind his action other than label that guy as a moron dick head.

if the repair bill is so damn huge or it is total loss issue, then he should fight the case, but the fact is the repair bill is less than 500 dollars, and he wants to take so much risk as to fight all the way to the court of appeal, this is something i don't understand, if he lose, he would have to declare bankrupt, but for his case, i think he is stupid, thats why he doesn't understand.

i have seen cases where, people have to go through major surgery, porsche burning up (total loss). his case is so small, what the judge has mention is right, it is a total waste of the court time, Mr lock has a choice to purse the case or not, but he still purse, this is how dumb, he is

again, i spit on this sort of guy, major insurance company should blacklist him forever, troublemaker

allentyb SG

this is standard, they will let you claim $50 per day for the loss of use for the car, then wait for the examiner to determine the damage, and now you want to claim against the other party, do you think the other party will admit that it is his fault, the other party also don't want his ncb to be affected, and furthermore, the examiner would have alot of cases to handle, if you expect your case to handle first, dream on

even you threaten the insurer a writ of summon, they will just refer this to their lawyer. You better pray that you will win bah, or GG

Moonlighter SG

lol this guy is my sister’s form teacher…

Kachui SG

Originally posted by allentyb:

look, in the first place, the repair fee is so little, i would have settle this thing long time ago, instead of dragging it for so long, i work in AIG, one of the biggest motor insurance company, in claims department, i have seen worse case before,[b] this sort of case, should have never reach court of appeal at all, so that mr lock must be a greedy man, that he wants to prolong this case for so long, i don't understand the rational behind his action other than label that guy as a moron dick head.

if the repair bill is so damn huge or it is total loss issue, then he should fight the case, but the fact is the repair bill is less than 500 dollars, and he wants to take so much risk as to fight all the way to the court of appeal, this is something i don't understand, if he lose, he would have to declare bankrupt, but for his case, i think he is stupid, thats why he doesn't understand.

i have seen cases where, people have to go through major surgery, porsche burning up (total loss). his case is so small, what the judge has mention is right, it is a total waste of the court time, Mr lock has a choice to purse the case or not, but he still purse, this is how dumb, he is

again, i spit on this sort of guy, major insurance company should blacklist him forever, troublemaker[/b]

I believe Mr Lock did not bring the case to the court of appeal but to the PDRC, and he thought he settled the case at the point when PDRC made its ruling. That was what the PDRC was set up for; to settle small dispute. But it was the lawyers who dragged it to the high court which ruled that Mr Lock has to pay $60,000 of legal fees, which forced him to have no other choice but bring the case to the appeal court. It would have settled if the lawyers did not dispute over a mere $60 of legal fees.

Anyhow, a few hundred dollars may mean nothing for a insurance professional like you, but for a teacher earning around $1800, that is a substantial sum.

Ponders SG

K, i agree with you in principle that yes, if the amount is small we should see whether further legal trouble is needed to settle.

I guess Mr Lock has his reasons for pursuing the matter.

But i believe such harsh words on him is uncalled for.

What I am unhappy about the entire case is NTUC trying to muscle out people.

allentyb SG

In a way, NTUC is protecting their own interest, that lock shouldn't have engage a lawyer in the first place for such a small amount of money and i understand what you are saying, just that i don't understand at all, why he doesn't want to settle this before it even reach the court, his stupidity is for all to be seen, the amount of lawyer fees mountain up to such a huge amount, is because of the prolong of the court cases, if he had settle for, what ntuc has to offer, he could get something out of it, he could be $20k richer, but he didn't, that is a stupid move of his, now he end up with nothing

seriously, such stupidity is for everyone to be seen, even NTUC wants to waive off the lawyer fees, so what happens, it is NTUC 1 - LOCK O, he end up with nothing,

wasted his time, wasted the court time, THIS CASE SHOULDN'T HAVE END UP IN COURT AT ALL, if anyone doesn't understand the picture at all, then i will be rofl = rolling on the floor laughing.

He acted in his pride, he took too much risk, as a result, he end up a loser, just another troublemaker for any insurance company

if he is claiming 100 thousand dollars against an insurance company, then his action will be justified, but a fool like him, doesn't understand the simplicity of this, yet, wanted to complicate the matters further, which he wanted to cover his ass by, going to the court, imagine he lose the case, he would have to declare bankrupted. Still the outcome is, he end up with nothing.

A fool turn down an offer of $20K and wanted more, end up with nothing, which remind me of a story: a cat was bitting on a fish on his way back, and as he was looking at his own reflection at the river side, he wanted to bite the other fish, he drop the fish, without knowingly that it is just his reflection, that he is seeing.

there, he lose his meal, months have been wasted, a fool, indeed he is. only stupidity can be describle for his actions, a blind man overcome by his own greed, thinking he could have more, only to end up with nothing, mockery to be spare on him, laughter can be heard from the wise, what is the conclusion , a good ending, nope, just a close chapter on this to remind the rest of the people out there, settle the damn case asap, otherwise it will end up bad on yourself only

allentyb SG

he had no choice but to bring it to court of appeal, then in retrospect, why did he engage a lawyer in the first place, for such a small amount of claims, the lawyer fee will be even more huge than what he is claiming, this is stupidity, and his own pride has eaten him up, he should have settled with NTUC long time ago, but he didn't, and you are just repeating what the new paper have been mentioning so far, and my point of view will not change - he is a moron and a greedy man

ORIGAMIST SG

what is GG ?

allentyb SG

GOOD GAME

pretzel SG

allentyb, I don't think you know what you are talking about at all. Firstly, he brought the case to the PDRC only and didn't intend to bring the matter further up the courts, for which he won: http://motoring.asiaone.com/Motoring/News/Story/A1Story20070913-25268.html
Why did he do that? Probably because the other party refused to take responsibility for the damages. I don't see any reason why he would take it up to the PDRC if the other party agreed to pay him. Of course, I don't know that for sure, but do you?

Secondly, he already received the cheque and it was because his lawyer made some counter-moves without his knowledge that made the other party appeal it to the higher courts, as can be seen from the article.

http://tnp.sg/news/story/0,4136,143756,00.html

Thirdly, he avoided the $25,000 offered by NTUC because he was being sued for $80,000 by his former lawyer, Andrew Hanam, for unpaid legal fees. If he had accepted the $25,000, he might have to end up paying $80,000 legal fees to the lawyer and after deducting the $25,000 given by NTUC, would still have to fork out $55,000. That's why he took it to the court of appeal. So now that he has won, he doesn't need to pay anything. Get your facts right

http://www.straitstimes.com/Free/Story/STIStory_158166.html

He was greedy? I have never read of him trying to get any money from anybody. He ended up not having to pay the legal fees of $150,000, from both NTUC and his former lawyer, which is exactly what he wanted. But now NTUC is still offering him some money anyway and you should ask why NTUC is suddenly becoming so generous instead.

BillyBong SG

Out of curiousity, what is the name of your insurance company?

It is unusual for them NOT to pursue the case, especially since you have the details of the other driver and have made an official accident statement. There are more than sufficient grounds for them to pursue NTUC, especially since the vehicle of the culprit was indeed registered under NTUC. Therefore, by proxy, they are the responsible party.

It doesn't matter whether the other party reported the accident. NTUC has an obligation to pay for your damages. Negligence and excuses from them are not acceptable.

And your insurance company sure as h.ell should not demand a payout from you before issuing a writ of summons. That's daylight robbery when they SHOULD be covering your costs and pursuing the case.

BillyBong SG

Any fine print that goes against fair practices cannot be applied. There was a recent ruling somewhere that one can sue on those grounds, especially if the terms of the insurance coverage are MEANT to protect a client, but have failed to adequately do so.

BillyBong SG

Your comments belly your limited knowledge of actual cases. And you still claim to work for AIG?

How sure were you that his first lawyer was not assigned to him by his insurance company?

FYI his first lawyer is being investigated for 'failure to discharge adequate responsibilities to protect his client'; this also implies that the lawyer may have overzealously pursued his claims to recover his legal fees, prompting the whole chain of events in the first place by sparking a tit-for-tat spat between him and NTUC.

Jonathan Lock had absolutely nothing to do with it. As with standard accident cases, most victims do not get daily updates from their lawyers on proceedings. How could he have orchestrated the whole bedlam as you claim? It is even more incredelous that he would mastermind an attempt to undermine the legal system since his claim was a paltry $100+.

You should spit on yourself first before slandering others.

« Previous Page Next Page »