PUBLIC TESTIMONY
Testimony by KJ Singh, President and Chief Operating Officer of Maya Assurance Company, on Insurance Challenges in the For-Hire Vehicle Industry
2:18:19
ยท
129 sec
KJ Singh, President and COO of Maya Assurance Company, testified about the challenges in providing insurance for the for-hire vehicle industry, particularly focusing on no-fault insurance abuse. He explained why his company decided to pull out of the NYC for-hire vehicle insurance market and discussed potential solutions to address these issues.
- Singh emphasized that no-fault abuse is the primary issue affecting insurance providers in the industry.
- He suggested that reducing policy limits could help curb no-fault abuse, but also noted that higher limits could be an option if abuse was curtailed.
- Singh indicated that lowering policy limits to $25,000-$50,000 might make it easier for other carriers to enter the market, but stressed that targeted no-fault abuse remains the core problem.
KJ Singh
2:18:19
Hello.
2:18:19
My name is KJ Singh.
2:18:20
I'm president and chief operating officer of My Assurance Company.
2:18:23
We are the one of few remaining insurance carriers providing liability insurance for the for hire vehicle.
Selvena N. Brooks-Powers
2:18:28
Can you move the mic closer to me, please?
KJ Singh
2:18:31
We started about twenty years ago in a small office in New York City with no desk, office, or employees, and we provided insurance liability for the for hire vehicle.
2:18:41
It was 100% of our BERCA business, and we successfully have tried to do that.
2:18:46
However, with the difficulty with the no fault abuse, it has become very difficult.
2:18:50
So approximately five years ago, we had decided to make the difficult decision to pull out of New York City for higher vehicle insurance industry.
2:18:59
The reason being, it was the no fault abuse that was getting us.
2:19:03
So the solutions for a policy limit and or regulation adjustment, I believe, do need to be discussed at the same time.
2:19:12
Unfortunately, the hardworking taxi drivers are targeted for their insurance policies.
2:19:18
They are specifically targeted with stage accidents for the passengers.
2:19:21
The drivers themselves do have protection, and they do need protection because they are targeted.
2:19:27
The abuse starts at the claim level of the passengers.
2:19:31
So the decision or the discussion to have a reduction in policy limit is to limit the no fault abuse.
2:19:39
If the no fault abuse was curtailed, minimum limits could be an option, 300 could be an option, or even the bigger bigger policy limits could be an option for protection of the drivers, the passengers, the public, and the community because that's what insurance does.
2:19:54
I'm not here to I'll be honest with you.
2:19:56
As an insurance carrier, policy limits are easy.
2:20:00
It's an acceptable decision we make to write.
2:20:03
Would $25.50 make it easier for other carriers to enter?
2:20:07
I believe so.
2:20:08
For our specific example, I'm on my tenth life of my nine lives right now with conversations with DFS, so I don't know if that's going to be beneficial with an increase or decrease in limits right now.
2:20:20
The targeted no fault abuse is the issue.
2:20:23
Thank you.
2:20:24
And you had previous no fault questions.
2:20:26
I can more than happy to answer some of those if you have any.