HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept
{
"id": 234821,
"url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/234821/?format=api",
"text_counter": 212,
"type": "speech",
"speaker_name": "Mr. Okemo",
"speaker_title": "",
"speaker": {
"id": 198,
"legal_name": "Chrysanthus Barnabas Okemo",
"slug": "chrysanthus-okemo"
},
"content": ", do not know much about insurance. As a result, they have been unfairly treated. When they fill in the so called \"proposal forms\", really, they do not know what they sign. The conditions of the policies are set out in small print. So, the proposers do not, really, know what they enter into. The time you will have a claim is when you will know where the problem lies. Therefore, we should make certain amendments to the Insurance Act to protect innocent wananchi who enter into contracts with insurance companies, which, later on, become difficult and take advantage of those people. I will pick up one example, out of many, to illustrate this point: You have an accident and you put up a claim, wanting to get paid by the insurer. What happens thereafter is a very mysterious process. You do not know what happens until the insurance company communicates with you. Ideally, since the insured person is the one who has suffered the loss, he should be involved in the appointment of the assessor. He should also have access to the assessor's report on the accident, because it affects him directly. However, the practice today is that an assessor's report on a claim is never made available to the claimant because it is supposed to be confidential to the insurance company. Insurance companies use this report to play around and negotiate. If you are ignorant, then you know that you are not going to get your full claim. But if you are tough, then you will get your full claim. For example, I was tough recently and it took me three years to get a simple claim, and I am an hon. Member and a former Minister for Finance! What about a matatu owner who has absolutely no idea how to go about it, what would happen to him? These are the people we must protect in the amendments that are coming. All this information that has been privy to the insurance company should be made available to other stakeholders. The insured should have a copy of the assessor's report so that he can actually see whether he has been treated fairly. This report can also form a basis of negotiation to arrive at the final claim. The law, today, provides that the insurance company has 60 days within which to accept or deny a claim. These are 60 days within which to make up his mind. If he makes up his mind that he is not going to pay you, then he has another 30 or 60 days within which he should pay, if he has accepted to pay the claim. Why should that be so? You have paid your premium, you have incurred a loss and an assessment has been made, you should be given a specific time within which the claim must be paid. There is no need to play around with legalities which give him so much room that at the end of the day, the insured suffers. So, I would like to encourage the Minister to look at some of these offensive clauses so that, in these minimum reforms that we are going to undertake, we should pick out may be three or four clauses which are really of concern to the ordinary citizen. We do not also want to appear as if we are being protective of the insurance companies against the citizens, because all the stakeholders must be fairly treated. Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir we can even cure the amendment which had been brought by the Minister regarding the 60 days repayment period very easily by just saying that, once you have received the premium as a broker, then you are deemed to have entered into a contract with your insured. As soon as the sticker comes from the insurance company to the broker, it is deemed that you actually have a contractual obligation between the insurance company and the broker to make sure that if there is a claim, it is settled. So, there is no need to prescribe time for the broker to remit money to the insurance company. That is not necessary. That should be left as a negotiation between the insurance company and the various brokers. That way, the rogue brokers will actually get out of business, because they will be told: \"You must pay cash because you are November 14, 1006 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES 3623 dishonest\" or \"We are not even doing business with you at all\". So, why do we have to prescribe the time for the broker to remit money to the insurance company? These are commercial transactions. So, it is between the broker and the insurance company to agree. The good reputable brokers will continue to enjoy the same terms because they have build good relationships with the insurance companies. So, why do we need to legalise that? Why do we need to legislate payments? These are commercial terms which should be between the insurance company and the broker. So, there is no need to prescribe whether it is one day, 30 or 60 days. So, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have looked at some of these clauses and a few others as the Finance, Planning and Trade Committee and, of course, we have invited the Minister, who is a friend of the Committee now. He can come to us, we can enter into friendly negotiations and come up with amendments that this House will pass without too much ado. With those few remarks, I beg to support. Thank you, Mr. Temporary Deputy Speaker, Sir."
}