OREANDA-NEWS. April 2, 2010. Relative to the statement published by Itil Insurance Company OJSC on March 25, 2010 Ingosstrakh OJSIC declares the following.

The statement that “currently and as of the date of publishing of the information by Ingosstrakh, Itil Insurance Company OJSC has no debts, except for the existing ones which are not due pursuant to the applicable law until the expiry of the 45-day term provided for by the Rules of the Russian Association of Motor Insurers for consideration of submitted claims” does not reflect the actual state of things.

Thus the debt of Itil Insurance Company OJSC as of March 26, 2010 amounts to 534,170.95 rubles. The total debt of Ingosstrakh OJSIC to Itil Insurance Company OJSC amounts to 47,256.55 rubles. Since January 1, 2008, eight claims have been submitted amounting to 231,736.46 rubles, two of which, in the amount of 37,870 rubles, were paid voluntarily, with respect to another two it was decided to recover the insurance indemnity in the amount of 49,833 rubles and the rest of the claims are still in courts.

In 2010, Itil Insurance Company OJSC has not made any voluntary payments at all.

It should also be noted that the letters are regularly sent by Itil IC OJSC by e-mail on the last day of the payment term. Such practice is obviously far from a proper one and can only be treated as very disingenuous.

A more unfair practice was used with respect to another claim sent with a complete set of documents. A copy of the payment order regarding indemnity payment, which had already been sent with the rest of the documents, was requested. The copy was resent by Ingosstrakh OJSIC, but Itil IC OJSC refused to pay the indemnity again. Ingosstrakh OJSIC forbearingly sent a copy of the payment order for the third time. When was the debt finally acknowledged by the debtor? Again it didn’t happen earlier than its statement was published by the mass media.

The debtor’s improper business practice, i.e. groundless documents’ requests and nonobservance of time for claims’ consideration had already been pointed out by Ingosstrakh OJSIC.

Thus, the claim regarding case No. 172-171-457507/08 was received on April 13, 2009, and the indemnity payment was credited to Ingosstrakh OJSIC only on June 5, 2009, i.e. after the expiry of the 45-day term.

As it follows from Itil IC notification, the company pays special attention to “official claims concerning delays in indemnity payments pursuant to subrogation procedure.”

Specially for the management of the debtor, we would like to remind that in March 2010 Ingosstrakh OJSIC filed the claims to the Russian Association of Motor Insurers and Federal Insurance Supervisory Authority for several insurance companies (including Itil IC OJSC), which regularly fail to observe the time of claims’ consideration and relevant insurance indemnity payments.

Earlier, in April 2009 Ingosstrakh OJSIC had filed the complaint to the Russian Association of Motor Insurers and Federal Insurance Supervisory Authority for violation of the applicable law by Itil IC OJSC at consideration of subrogation claims. Upon receipt of the reply from Itil IC OJSC Ingosstrakh OJSIC, having found the reasoning of Itil IC OJSC unsatisfactory, resent the claim to the Russian Association of Motor Insurers requesting an audit of Itil IC OJSCf to check the observance of the procedure and terms of damage compensation to the injured persons.

In its statement Itil IC mentioned its “feelings of manipulations with falsified data”.

We’d like to emphasize that publishing of the information about such “feelings” that are not based on any actual facts is a solid ground for applying to a court with a claim for compensation for the losses caused to our company by such statements.