保险公司不承认马驰车祸是意外拒绝赔偿，你认为呢？

亲爱宝贝 · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:46:51|来自：新加坡

goldenstar 发表于 14-8-2012 10:44
那问保险公司不是意外是神马？自杀？

收钱容易吐钱难。

强顶

夕阳剪影 · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:48:58|来自：新加坡

我朋友直行车被右转车高速撞上，整辆车报废，撞他的人的保险公司全赔，包括医药费和车价。要说过错那人肯定是错了，难道有过错就不是意外吗？那这样买保险有什么用？鄙视AXA

peacelife3 · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:56:17|来自：新加坡

当然是意外啦，难道还是故意所为

egold · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:56:42|来自：新加坡

吃进去容易，吐出来难，除非是毒药

夕阳剪影 · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:56:57|来自：新加坡

The Straits Times reported insurers AXA Singapore had told Mr Ma's family that the crash on May 12 at Rochor Road was a "collision", not an accident.

What this means in the insurance industry is that the driver was aware that his actions would cause an accident, thereby voiding the insurers' liability to make a payout.

Mr Ma's family wants the High Court to reject this finding by suing the insurers.

The lawsuit is believed to be the first such reported case in Singapore and is becoming a public interest issue as to how accidents are treated as "collisions", under which an insurer can reject liability. The accident in May left three, including Mr Ma, dead and two others injured. He had allegedly run a red light, crashed into a taxi, which then hit a motorcycle

夕阳剪影 · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:57:42|来自：新加坡

照上述解毒，保险公司认为马驰自杀？

lilywhite · 发表于 14-8-2012 10:59:51|来自：新加坡

保险公司太无耻了！如果都这样，交保险干嘛？

老鼠宝宝 · 发表于 14-8-2012 11:07:02|来自：新加坡

肯定是意外啊。。。

goldenstar · 发表于 14-8-2012 11:07:38|来自：新加坡

夕阳剪影发表于 14-8-2012 10:56
The Straits Times reported insurers AXA Singapore had told Mr Ma's family that the crash on May 12 a ...

the driver was aware that his actions would cause an accident

保险公司在主观强加事主是故意闯红灯。
造成事故并不是速度而是闯红灯。但即使事主当时是故意闯红灯，也没有证据证明他是判断失误，忽略，被干扰还是故意。以本路段常发事故来看，交通局也承认路[关键词屏蔽]通灯设计有问题。

即使这样，这种事故不可能是第一起发生在新加坡的类似事故。AXA明显是想挟持民意突破赔款。very king eight egg！！！

话说一周后不是一起一猫一样的碰撞吗？那个赔了没？