The workings of insurance companies

I refer to the letter of Evander M. Borg of Middlesea Insurance (January 8).

What this company secretary considers as "allegations" are to me a spate of constructive critical suggestions and wholesome ideas that might enhance and perhaps reform the policy of the insurance company he represents. Incidentally, that a number of their agents "are no longer involved in marketing" your home insurance policy is no allegation but a fact that reinforces my idea of reform!

Moreover, the "opinion" expressed in the newspaper did not really concern "my case" as much as it did defend the interests of senior citizens/shareholders of the company. These senior citizens/shareholders, though they have not raised their voices in protest, have felt aggrieved by the policy of Middlesea. So the Data Protection Act and the Professional Secrecy Act do not really come into play.

Mr Borg plans his defensive argument on principles of economic theory and commercial ramifications expressed, at times, in such long-winded sentences that they lose all clarity of meaning and of comprehension. Furthermore, the five points he lists do not offer the correct answers to my so called "allegations".

Mr Borg insists that his company has not removed the discounts granted to all senior citizens (bil-Kartanzjan!) and premiums have not increased by 100 per cent. Well I might not be a genius in maths but I have certainly done my homework. If last year the premium of my home insurance was Lm152.58 and this year I am forced to pay Lm331.37, then I should have said that these annual premiums have increased by more than 100 per cent.

The logic of this second point is adulterated with the sophism much used by philosophy teachers of ancient Greece: therefore it is spurious, irrelevant and purposely misleading. Like anybody else, Kartanzjan holders pay their premiums; like all insurance companies, Middlesea accepts to take the risk. Therefore, Middlesea must honour its commitments to all policy holders who suffer damage irrespective of age or residence or even status. So what is so "positive" in honouring claims of Kartanzjan holders and how is discrimination involved? Paying out claims is not a question of granting favours or awarding "preferential treatment"; it is a moral, social and legal obligation towards all who suffer damages.

In his long diatribe on the workings of insurance companies, Mr Borg admits that "the premiums of the many pay for the claims of the few". Precisely, my reforming suggestion was the principle of justice that the good should be rewarded and the bad punished. So if Middlesea had considered the many steps I enumerated that senior citizens take to protect their property, then they should not have been punished. So by drawing a decision across the board Middlesea have not subscribed to the "principle of poetic justice".

Mr Borg commits a professional blunder: he gives me the lie when he insists that "a company representative replied to Mr Bugeja in writing". I categorically deny this. Somebody must have shirked his duty and Mr Borg had not checked his facts properly before making his accusation. Up to January 11, I had no written reply. It was precisely this lack of respect that drove me to write to the newspaper.

Speaking of respect, if Mr Borg's repeated phrase Tal-Kartanzjan was meant as a derogatory remark, let me remind him that present-day senior citizens have risen from the ashes of a murderous World War II to give Malta that professionalism that presumably is evidently lacking in some representatives of Middlesea Insurance Company.