CMFAS PGI – Personal General Insurance Exam

Correct: Statement II is correct because the policy provides that if a claim has been paid for a permanent disability and the insured subsequently dies from the same accident within 104 weeks, the insurer will pay the difference between the death benefit and the amount already paid. Statement III is correct because the aggregate compensation for death and permanent disability results is capped at 100% of the highest sum insured among those specific benefits for any one period of insurance.

Incorrect: Statement I is incorrect because the renewal bonus is only granted if no claims of any kind have arisen during the preceding period; since Mr. Lee claimed for medical expenses, he is ineligible for the bonus. Statement IV is incorrect because the 10% renewal bonus is specifically restricted to the sum insured for death and permanent total disablement and does not apply to other benefits like medical expenses or hospital cash.

Takeaway: To qualify for a renewal bonus, an insured must have a completely claim-free record for the year, and the bonus itself only increases the coverage for death and permanent total disablement. Therefore, statements II and III are correct.

Correct: The claimant is responsible for the cost of the medical certificate, and the insurer is authorized to access his entire medical history including prior records. The medical certificate form explicitly states that no claim can be admitted unless a certificate is furnished at the expense of the claimant. Additionally, the authorization section signed by the claimant grants the insurer permission to obtain all information and copies of all hospital or medical records, including prior medical history, to assess the claim properly.

Incorrect: The suggestion that the insurance company covers the cost of the certificate is wrong because the form clearly states the expense is borne by the claimant. The idea that the insurer is restricted to records from the current year or only the current surgery is incorrect because the authorization specifically includes the right to access the claimant’s prior medical history. The claim that the employer must pay for the certificate is not a requirement of the standard claim process described in the documentation.

Takeaway: In personal general insurance claims, the claimant must bear the cost of providing medical evidence and provide broad authorization for the insurer to review their full medical history.

Correct: Statement I is correct because the terrorism extension specifically excludes acts involving biological, chemical, or nuclear weapons. Statement III is correct because children are only covered for specific results (A, B, and E) and their limit is capped at 10% of the parent’s sum insured for those specific benefits.

Incorrect: Statement II is incorrect because the policy explicitly excludes injuries sustained during actual warfare or war-like operations, regardless of whether the person is a combatant or non-combatant. Statement IV is incorrect because the presumption of death requires the insured person to be missing for twelve consecutive months, not six.

Takeaway: Personal accident policies often include extensions for specific risks like terrorism and reservist training, but these are subject to strict exclusions regarding warfare and non-conventional weapons. Therefore, statements I and III are correct.

Correct: Denying the claim is the right course of action because the policy includes a specific general exception for injuries resulting from underwater activities that require the use of compressed air or gas. Since the insured used a breathing apparatus, the injury falls under this exclusion regardless of the purpose of the dive.

Incorrect: The argument for approval based on the recreational nature of the activity is wrong because the exclusion for compressed air diving applies to all instances, not just professional ones. The claim that the exclusion only applies to professional divers is incorrect because the policy lists hazardous activities and high-risk occupations as separate, distinct categories of exclusions. The statement that all overseas injuries are excluded is wrong because standard personal accident policies generally offer worldwide protection unless a specific territorial limit is stated.

Takeaway: Insurers exclude high-risk activities like diving with compressed air from standard personal accident coverage, and these exclusions apply regardless of whether the activity is for leisure or work.

Correct: The policyholder must bear the costs for any medical reports required to substantiate the claim is the right answer because the claim form explicitly states that all medical reports must be submitted at the claimant’s expense before a claim can be admitted. This ensures the insurer has the necessary evidence to evaluate the claim without incurring administrative costs for data collection.

Incorrect: The statement about the insurer’s receipt of the form being an admission of liability is wrong because the form clearly states that acceptance of the document is not an admission of liability. The statement regarding digital scans is incorrect because the insurer requires original documents to substantiate claims. The statement about the insurer reimbursing the costs for doctor’s certification is wrong because all medical reports and certifications are the financial responsibility of the claimant.

Takeaway: When filing a foreign domestic worker insurance claim, the policyholder is responsible for providing original documentation and paying for all required medical reports.

Correct: The policy provides indemnity for third-party liability when an individual insured is driving a private car that they do not own, provided that the car is not hired to them, their employer, or their partner under a hire purchase agreement or similar arrangement.

Incorrect: The option regarding a commercial van is incorrect because the extension specifically applies only when the insured is driving another private car, not a commercial vehicle. The option regarding a corporate entity is wrong because this benefit is strictly limited to individuals and is explicitly excluded for companies. The option regarding the insured’s car being in a workshop is incorrect because the coverage for driving another car is a standard extension for individuals and does not require the insured’s own vehicle to be undergoing repairs or be otherwise unavailable.

Takeaway: Third-party liability coverage extends to an individual insured driving another private car, as long as that car is not owned by or hired to the insured or their employer.

Correct: Statement I is correct because total disablement is defined as a condition where an injury completely prevents the insured person from pursuing their ordinary occupation or attending to any business affairs. Statement IV is correct because the eligibility criteria for this personal accident policy specifically restrict coverage to individuals within the age range of 7 to 70 years.

Incorrect: Statement II is incorrect because partial disablement does not apply to any minor task; instead, it requires that the insured be prevented from attending to a material portion of their daily occupational duties. Statement III is incorrect because, according to the standard claim procedures, the fee for the attending physician’s medical report must be paid by the insured person or the claimant, not the insurance company.

Takeaway: Claimants are responsible for medical report fees, and policy benefits for disablement are strictly based on whether the injury prevents the performance of all or a significant portion of work duties. Therefore, statements I and IV are correct.

Correct: Statement I is correct because the policy terms provide for double indemnity, meaning the lump sum benefit is doubled, if the accidental death occurs while the insured is traveling on public conveyance. Statement III is correct because the claim instructions specify that the policyholder must pay for the medical report from the attending physician at their own expense initially, with the insurer providing reimbursement up to the stated policy limit.

Incorrect: Statement II is incorrect because the benefit for Traditional Chinese Medicine is a fixed limit of $750 across all four plans (A, B, C, and D) and does not increase with the plan level. Statement IV is incorrect because the premium table explicitly marks Plan D as “N.A.” (Not Available) for Occupational Class 3, meaning these individuals are restricted to Plans A, B, and C only.

Takeaway: Personal accident insurance often includes specific conditions like double indemnity for public transport accidents and may restrict access to higher-tier plans based on the risk level of the insured’s occupation. Therefore, statements I and III are correct.

Correct: Authorizing a lump sum payment of S$5,000 is the right answer because while the insured is entitled to the full amount specified in the Scale of Compensation, other covered individuals such as authorized drivers or passengers are typically entitled to only 50% of those specified sums.

Incorrect: The proposal to pay the full S$10,000 is wrong because the standard policy terms reduce the benefit for non-insured drivers to half. The decision to decline the claim is wrong because authorized drivers are explicitly included in the Personal Accident coverage subject to the vehicle’s seating capacity. The suggestion to pay medical expenses up to S$1,000 is wrong because that describes the Medical Expenses reimbursement section, which is a separate coverage from the fixed lump sum benefits provided under the Personal Accident section.

Takeaway: Personal Accident benefits provide fixed lump sum payments for specific injuries, but these amounts are typically reduced by half for passengers and authorized drivers compared to the insured.

Correct: Statement II is correct because the additional excess for high-risk drivers, such as those who are elderly, young, or inexperienced, is cumulative and is applied on top of any other existing policy excess. Statement III is correct because standard policy excesses are typically waived for specific types of losses, including those caused by fire, lightning, or the theft of the vehicle.

Incorrect: Statement I is incorrect because the “Excess – Damage Claims” is specifically restricted to Section I (Insurance on the Motor Vehicle) and does not apply to third-party property damage claims. Statement IV is incorrect because the “Unnamed Driver Excess” is only operative for claims arising under Section I of the policy, rather than both Section I and Section II.

Takeaway: Motor insurance excesses are classified by the specific risk or driver profile they target, and certain perils like fire and theft are generally exempt from these initial payment requirements. Therefore, statements II and III are correct.

Correct: Statement I is correct because travel insurance policies typically provide an automatic extension of the coverage period if the insured person is hospitalised or delayed by a public transport failure. Statement II is correct because this automatic extension is not indefinite and is usually capped at a specific duration, such as 30 days, to allow the insured sufficient time to recover and return home.

Incorrect: Statement III is incorrect because the automatic extension is not restricted to natural disasters; it also applies to medical emergencies and transport delays beyond the insured’s control. Statement IV is incorrect because the automatic extension for medical reasons is generally provided free of charge, rather than requiring an immediate pro-rated premium payment.

Takeaway: Travel insurance includes a built-in extension feature that maintains coverage at no extra cost if the insured is unable to return home as scheduled due to specific unforeseen events like illness or injury. Therefore, statements I and II are correct.

Correct: Maintaining the NCD is the right action because the industry guide used in Singapore specifies that if an insured’s liability is 20% or less in an accident with an identified vehicle, their discount is not affected.

Incorrect: The option to reduce the NCD regardless of liability is wrong because the rules allow for NCD preservation in low-liability cases. The requirement for 0% liability is incorrect as the threshold is actually 20%. The suggestion to wait for a court ruling is wrong because the BOLA is specifically used by insurers to determine NCD impact and speed up the claims process.

Takeaway: Under the Barometer of Liability Agreement, a policyholder’s No Claim Discount is preserved if their liability in an accident involving an identified vehicle is 20% or less.

Correct: Ensuring that no single trip exceeds the 90 or 92-day limit is the right action because annual travel policies, while covering an unlimited number of trips, impose a maximum duration for each individual journey.

Incorrect: The suggestion that total travel days are capped at 180 is wrong because the 180 to 185-day limit refers to the maximum length of a single-trip policy, not the cumulative total of an annual plan. The claim that coverage starts three hours before departure is incorrect as the policy begins the moment the insured leaves their home or workplace; the three-hour window actually applies to the period after returning to Singapore. The statement regarding age 70 is wrong because insurers typically reduce benefit limits for individuals once they reach that age rather than maintaining full coverage.

Takeaway: Frequent travelers using annual policies must monitor the length of each individual trip to ensure they do not exceed the per-trip duration limit, which is typically 90 or 92 days.

Correct: The double indemnity benefit is specifically designed to pay twice the capital sum for death or permanent disablement if the accident occurs while the insured is a fare-paying passenger on a common carrier or public transport, such as an underground train.

Incorrect: The scenario involving walking to a bus terminal is incorrect because the benefit requires the insured to be riding as a passenger in the vehicle when the accident occurs. The rental vehicle scenario is wrong because a rental car is not considered a common carrier or public conveyance for the purpose of double indemnity. The private chartered plane scenario is incorrect because the benefit applies to public transport available to the general fare-paying public, rather than private or non-public transport arrangements.

Takeaway: Double indemnity provides a payment of twice the standard benefit for death or permanent disablement, provided the accident happens while the insured is a fare-paying passenger on a public common carrier.

Correct: The statement claiming that a relative can receive both hospital visit and compassionate visit benefits is the right answer because it is false. Travel insurance policies specifically state that a claim can be made for either a hospital visit or a compassionate visit, but not both, for the same insured event.

Incorrect: The statement regarding the hospital confinement benefit is true because this benefit is designed as a fixed daily cash payment that is independent of the actual medical costs incurred. The statement about follow-up medical treatment in Singapore is true as policies typically allow for a 31-day window for continued treatment after the insured person returns. The statement about follow-up hospitalisation in Singapore is true because insurers generally require the hospital admission to occur within a specific timeframe, such as seven days, immediately following the return to Singapore.

Takeaway: While travel insurance provides various medical and visit benefits, the hospital visit and compassionate visit benefits are mutually exclusive, meaning only one of these two benefits can be claimed.

Correct: Statement I is correct because the policy requires the insured to take reasonable steps to prevent further loss; driving a vehicle after an accident but before repairs excludes any resulting extension of damage from the scope of indemnity. Statement II is correct because the insured is required to provide seven days’ written notice and return the physical Certificate of Insurance to the insurer to process a cancellation.

Incorrect: Statement III is incorrect because the policy specifically extends coverage to family members and permitted drivers after the insured’s death, provided the permission to drive was not withdrawn prior to the death. Statement IV is incorrect because the insurer is only required to give seven days’ notice for cancellation, and the provision for minimum premium retention applies to cancellations initiated by the insured, not the insurer.

Takeaway: Motor insurance policies impose ongoing duties on the insured to safeguard the vehicle and follow specific notice and documentation procedures when modifying or terminating the contract. Therefore, statements I and II are correct.

Correct: Providing no more than two rides per day and ensuring total payments do not exceed the actual expenses of the trip is the right answer because Singapore law allows carpooling under these specific conditions without it being classified as ‘hire or reward’ use.

Incorrect: The suggestion that a driver can earn a small profit margin for maintenance is wrong because the law strictly stipulates that payments must not be for profit and must only cover direct expenses like fuel and tolls. The scenario involving four trips per day is wrong because the legal limit for such carpooling arrangements is strictly capped at two rides daily. The option regarding soliciting passengers at a taxi stand is wrong because it is illegal to solicit passengers in public spaces or carparks, and charging market rates typically exceeds the expense-recovery rule.

Takeaway: Private motor insurance remains valid for carpooling only if the driver limits the service to two rides per day and collects no more than the actual trip expenses.

Correct: Statement I is correct because the mandatory minimum coverage includes liability for death or bodily injury to third parties, which explicitly includes passengers. Statement III is correct because statutory requirements dictate that a motor insurance policy is legally ineffective unless a valid Certificate of Insurance has been issued by the insurer.

Incorrect: Statement II is incorrect because an Act Liability Only policy is strictly limited to bodily injury and death; it does not provide any coverage for property damage to third-party vehicles or assets. Statement IV is incorrect because this basic level of insurance is intended to protect third parties and does not provide any indemnity for the driver’s own bodily injuries.

Takeaway: The Act Liability Only policy is the statutory minimum requirement in Singapore, focusing exclusively on third-party bodily injury and death while requiring a valid Certificate of Insurance for the policy to be legally recognized. Therefore, statements I and III are correct.

Correct: The new insurer will reduce the NCD to 20% because the NCD Protector benefit is not transferable between different insurance companies. While the NCD Protector allows the insured to maintain their 50% discount with their current insurer despite a claim, this benefit is specific to that insurer and cannot be moved to a competitor. Upon switching, the standard NCD reduction rules apply, which typically lower a 50% discount to 20% after one claim.

Incorrect: The statement that the new insurer will recognize the 50% NCD is wrong because the protection benefit is strictly non-transferable between providers. The suggestion that the NCD will be reset to 0% is incorrect because, under the standard NCD scale, a single claim reduces a 50% NCD to 20%, not zero. The idea of paying a transfer fee to maintain the protected status is wrong as no such mechanism exists under the standard policy terms for transferring NCD protection.

Takeaway: An NCD Protector is an insurer-specific extension that preserves a discount level after a claim, but the protected status is lost if the policyholder chooses to switch to a different insurance company.

Correct: The insurer pays for the replacement without applying the policy excess or reducing the No Claim Discount (NCD) because the windscreen extension treats the claim as a separate issue from the main policy. When this specific extension is purchased, the insurer waives the standard requirement for the insured to pay an excess and ensures the NCD entitlement remains unaffected by the claim.

Incorrect: The claim that the insurer must apply the standard policy excess and reduce the NCD is wrong because that only applies to standard policies where the windscreen extension has not been purchased. The statement that the NCD will be reduced by one level is incorrect because the extension is designed to protect the NCD fully, not partially. The claim that coverage only applies to collisions with other vehicles is wrong because the extension covers broken windscreen or window glass regardless of whether a collision occurred, such as damage from a flying stone.

Takeaway: A windscreen extension allows the insured to replace broken glass without paying the policy excess or suffering a reduction in their No Claim Discount.

Correct: Statement III is correct because travel curtailment benefits are designed to reimburse the insured for additional travel expenses incurred when they must return home early due to specific disrupting events, such as a hijacking. Statement IV is correct because kidnap and hostage coverage typically excludes events that occur in countries where United Nations armed forces are present and active.

Incorrect: Statement I is incorrect because travel cancellation coverage specifically excludes claims made solely due to a change of mind; the benefit only triggers for unforeseen events like illness or natural disasters. Statement II is incorrect because the decision regarding emergency medical repatriation is strictly determined by the attending medical doctor or the insurer’s contracted specialist company, rather than the insured’s next of kin.

Takeaway: Travel insurance distinguishes between cancellation (before departure) and curtailment (during the trip), with specific exclusions applying to non-accidental reasons for claim and high-risk geopolitical environments. Therefore, statements III and IV are correct.

Correct: Advising the client that the travel agent is required to seek and record their decision is the right answer because for payments of S$500 or more, licensed travel agents in Singapore must document whether the customer wishes to purchase travel insurance covering agency insolvency.

Incorrect: The statement that insolvency coverage is mandatory is wrong because the regulation only requires the agent to ask for the customer’s decision, not to compel the purchase. The suggestion to cancel the booking if the agent does not provide free insurance is incorrect as there is no regulatory requirement for agents to provide this coverage at no cost. The claim that coverage is only available for packages exceeding S$2,000 is wrong because the actual regulatory threshold for recording the decision is S$500 for deposits or S$1,000 for travel packages.

Takeaway: Travel agents must document a customer’s choice regarding insolvency insurance for any deposit of S$500 or more or any travel package costing S$1,000 or more.

Correct: Providing address and insurer details along with taking photos of the scene and vehicles is the right action because the Motor Claims Framework requires the exchange of specific particulars including name, NRIC/FIN, telephone number, address, and insurer, as well as the collection of visual evidence for accident reporting.

Incorrect: The option to arrange an immediate medical exam is wrong because the requirement for drivers aged 65 and above to submit medical reports occurs every three years and is not triggered by an accident. The suggestion to use an independent tow-truck is incorrect as the framework explicitly instructs motorists to avoid unauthorized tow-truck operators and repair workshops to ensure proper claims handling. The choice to only exchange NRIC and phone numbers is wrong because it fails to meet the full information exchange requirements, which must include the address and insurer of the parties involved.

Takeaway: Following an accident, motorists must exchange comprehensive personal and insurance information and document the scene with photos to comply with industry-standard reporting procedures.

Correct: The statement regarding the NCD protector is the right answer because the No Claim Discount (NCD) protector specifically does not apply to cases where the discount is lost due to the policyholder’s failure to report an accident or for reporting an accident late. Even with a protector, the insured must still comply with all policy conditions, including timely reporting requirements.

Incorrect: The statement about car usage is true because risk exposure is directly linked to how often a car is on the road; higher mileage for business purposes increases the statistical likelihood of an accident. The statement about vehicle age is true because insurers have different underwriting philosophies; some reduce premiums as the car’s value drops, while others maintain rates because the potential cost of third-party liability does not decrease as the car gets older. The statement about company cars is true because motor insurance usage is categorized into classes where business and company use are rated higher than social, domestic, and pleasure use.

Takeaway: While an NCD protector helps maintain a discount after a claim, it does not excuse the policyholder from fundamental obligations like the timely reporting of accidents.

Correct: Japan is generally classified under the Asia Area for premium purposes, though travelers must be aware that some insurers might exclude it from this category.

Incorrect: The ASEAN Area is wrong because it specifically includes only Southeast Asian nations like Brunei, Malaysia, and Thailand, excluding Japan. The Worldwide Area is incorrect as it is a more expensive category intended for the rest of the world, and Japan is typically covered under the Asia table. The Global Area option is wrong because ‘Global’ is usually a synonym for Worldwide, and developed nations are not automatically excluded from regional Asia plans.

Takeaway: While Japan is typically in the Asia Area, premium costs can vary if an insurer classifies it differently, requiring careful selection during application.

Correct: The statement that a 30-day extension applies to transport delays is false because the standard automatic extension for delays involving a common carrier or public transport is actually 14 days.

Incorrect: The 30-day extension for medical reasons is a true statement as this longer period is granted when an insured person is unable to travel due to injury or illness. The statement about no additional premium is also true because these extensions are designed to be automatic and free of charge for the specified periods. The statement regarding quarantine is true because the policy specifically includes doctor-advised quarantine as a valid reason for the medical extension.

Takeaway: Automatic extensions are capped at 14 days for transport delays and 30 days for medical reasons, provided the cause is covered by the policy.

Correct: Statement I is correct because the motor accident reporting framework specifically mandates that a police report must be filed whenever a cyclist or pedestrian is involved, regardless of the immediate physical condition of the parties. Statement III is correct because the Public Trustee serves as the final appellate authority for claimants who are dissatisfied with the compensation decisions made by the Motor Insurers’ Bureau.

Incorrect: Statement II is incorrect because the Motor Insurers’ Bureau is strictly limited by its governing agreements to provide compensation for bodily injury claims only and does not cover property or vehicle damage. Statement IV is incorrect because the definition of an injury accident is not limited to ambulance transport; it also includes cases where a party is hospitalised or given at least three days of medical leave after using other transport, or if latent injuries develop later.

Takeaway: While the Motor Insurers’ Bureau provides a safety net for bodily injuries caused by untraced or uninsured motorists, strict police reporting requirements remain for accidents involving vulnerable road users or those resulting in significant medical leave. Therefore, statements I and III are correct.

Correct: Motorists are required to report all accidents to their insurer within 24 hours or by the next working day, regardless of whether there is visible damage or if a private settlement has been reached. This ensures the insurer is notified in case the other party decides to file a claim later, protecting the insured’s right to coverage.

Incorrect: The idea that reporting is only necessary if the other driver files a claim is wrong because failing to report within the stipulated time allows the insurer to repudiate liability. The belief that a private settlement removes the need to report is a common misconception; the reporting requirement remains mandatory to avoid NCD reductions or policy cancellation. Waiting until the policy renewal date is incorrect because the reporting window is strictly limited to 24 hours or the next working day.

Takeaway: All motor accidents must be reported to the insurer within 24 hours or the next working day to maintain full policy protection and avoid penalties like NCD reduction.

Correct: The statement that the agreement prevents an insurer from exercising its legal right to seek subrogation recovery is the right answer because the Barometer of Liability Agreement (BOLA) explicitly does not stop an insurer from exercising its subrogation rights or contesting liability under the law. It is designed to facilitate amicable settlements but does not remove legal recourse.

Incorrect: The description of predetermined charts is wrong because BOLA specifically uses these agreed-upon scenarios to determine how much each party is liable, which is a factual feature of the agreement. The mention of the No Claim Discount is wrong because it accurately states the rule where an insured’s discount is preserved if their liability is 20% or less in an accident with an identified car. The statement about simplifying the recovery process is wrong because BOLA was indeed implemented to replace the Knock-For-Knock Agreement and improve the administrative efficiency of claims management.

Takeaway: BOLA provides a framework for insurers to settle liability disputes efficiently using predetermined scenarios without removing their underlying legal right to pursue subrogation or contest liability in court.

Correct: The standard Private Motorcycle Insurance policy specifically excludes coverage for the insured when they are operating a motorcycle other than the one named in the policy. Unlike car insurance, there is no extension for driving other vehicles.

Incorrect: The idea that the policy provides unlimited liability or property damage coverage while riding any motorcycle is incorrect because the extension for driving other vehicles is not a standard feature of motorcycle policies. The claim that coverage depends on the engine capacity or make of the other motorcycle is also false as the exclusion applies to all other motorcycles regardless of their technical specifications.

Takeaway: A key distinction between car and motorcycle insurance is that motorcycle policies do not cover the insured for third-party liability while they are driving another vehicle.