WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 10, 1977
H
LEGCO URGED TO PLUG
THIRD PARTY INSURANCE LOOPHOLES
******
UNOFFICIAL LEGISLATIVE COUNCILLOR. THE HON. OSWALD CHEUNG, PROPOSED TO SEAL THE LOOPHOLES IN THE MOTOR VEHICLES INSURANCE (THIRD PARTY RISKS) ORDINANCE WHICH ALLOW INSURANCE COMPANIES TO WRIGGLE OUT OF LIABILITY IN HONG KONG.
MOVING AN ADJOURNMENT DEBATE ON THIRD PARTY INSURANCE IN THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL TODAY, MR. CHEUNG POINTED OUT THERE IS NO MOTOR INSURERS BUREAU IN HONG KONG, AND OUR LEGISLATION IS THEREFORE +GLARINGLY DEFECTIVE, AS IT IS BASED ON THE +BULLET RIDDLED ACTS OF 1930 AND 1934.+
HE TABLED A NUMBER OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE ORDINANCE, SUGGESTING THAT:
*
*
ALL OWNERS OF MOTOR VEHICLES SHOULD BE OBLIGED TO INSURE THEMSELVES AGAINST THE CLAIMS OF THIRD PARTIES WHENEVER
IT IS ESTABLISHED THAT THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN NEGLIGENTLY AND WHEN DRIVEN WITH THE OWNER'S CONSENT, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED AND
INSURERS BE FORBIDDEN FROM RELYING ON A BREACH OF CONDITION, MISREPRESENTATION OR NON-DISLOSURE AS AGAINST A THIRD PARTY ONCE THE THIRD PARTY HAS BEEN INJURED.
AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO HIS PROPOSALS, MR. CHEUNG SAID IT MIGHT BE RIGHT TO INTRODUCE OR ASK THE INSURANCE COMPANY IN HONG KONG TO INTRODUCE A MOTOR INSURANCE BUREAU.
MR. CHEUNG POINTED OUT THAT ONLY RECENTLY HE BECAME AWARE OF THE MANY SHIFTS AND DEVICES WHICH HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED BY
INSURERS TO AVOID LIABILITY, IN CASES WHEN NEGLIGENCE HAS BEEN CLEARLY ESTABLISHED AGAINST THE DRIVER AND THE PARTY INSURED.
+ INSURERS WOULD HEDGE THE POLICIES WITH SO MANY WARRANTIES AND CONDITIONS THAT THEY WERE ABLE TO ESCAPE LIABILITY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF AT THE TIME OF THE ACCIDENT, THE CAR WAS BEING DRIVEN BY A JEW, A BOOKMAKER OR AN ACTOR,+ HE SAID.
+SOMEWHERE IN THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS, THROUGH COMPROMISES AND AMENDMENTS, THE ROAD TRAFFIC ACT OF 1930 BECAME LARGELY USELESS, AND THE INTENTION OF THE LEGISLATURE WAS LARGELY FRUSTRATED.
+PERSONS INJURED OR THEIR DEPENDANTS WERE UNABLE TO RECOVER AGAINST THE INSURANCE COMPANIES, AND WERE LEFT WITH EMPTY JUDGMENTS AGAINST INDIGENT DRIVERS AND OWNERS AGAINST WHOM NEGLIGENCE HAD BEEN CLEARLY ESTABLISHED, HE SAID.
MR. CHEUNG SAID IT WAS A MISTAKE TO ALLOW THE MOTOR IST SUCH FREEDOM OF CHOICE AS TO WHAT RISKS HE SHOULD INSURE AGAINST, AND TO ALLOW INSURERS TO AVOID LIABILITY AFTER INJURY TO A THIRD PARTY HAS CCCURRED.
/+A HAN