Quinn Insurance in Administration

[sammymaguire]

anyone with an ounce of common sense would know that this should have been dealt with in a totally different manner and could have meant the business could have been whipped back in to line without jeoaprdising thousands of jobs.

why are you so anti-QI? If they decided to loan some money from one part of the company to another as it was there, thats hardly the fraud crime of the century???

[supersarsfields]

^{The issue is the removal of solvency under the table and you know it.}

Wrong again. The issues that the regulator had were in response to the guarantees that had been declared in the accounts of QD back to 2005 but just hadn't been picked up by the regulator. Now QD can have no issues with the fact that they were picked up but they weren't trying to hide them. These were in relation to QD's assets (Buildings etc) being used as guarantees by QG. By law an insurance company can't use any assests against other companies. Therefore without these the solvency ratio dropped. But QD were unaware of this (Prob going back to an insurance company being run by a business man). but all this was declared in the accounts.

[Maiden1]

There is no point arguing with you Dublinfella.  The government and the regulators let QD go to the wall and put thousands of people directly or indirectly out of work.  The company was making huge profit and had plenty of money to cover all claims (more than VHI and more than most insurance companies in the EU).  The government have been letting VHI break the regulations for 11 years and are giving them another 2 years (which will probably get expended again) to get up to the recommended level.  'VHI are having problems because BUPA took their customers' so what, if I owned a fruit and vegetable shop and went to the bank manager and said I was having solvency problems because someone up the road opened a better one do you think he would have much sympathy for me?  If there is 1 rule for the goose then there should be the same for the gander.

[haranguerer]

Link to what? That QD delay as long as possible paying claims or that they were moving money around illegally?

You said Quinn delay paying claims as long as possible, thus putting them in an advantage against other insurance firms, because they dont have to hold the same levels of money. For starters that doesnt follow logic: the same money will still have to go out, just a little later, so the only point where you may have higher levels of cash would be for the first few months of such a policy being implemented. But anyway - explain where your evidence for any of that is.

Looks to me like the government saw the chance to screw a competitor of their own insurance company, and took it. Corrupt scumbags.

[dublinfella]

^{The issue is the removal of solvency under the table and you know it.}

Wrong again. The issues that the regulator had were in response to the guarantees that had been declared in the accounts of QD back to 2005 but just hadn't been picked up by the regulator. Now QD can have no issues with the fact that they were picked up but they weren't trying to hide them. These were in relation to QD's assets (Buildings etc) being used as guarantees by QG. By law an insurance company can't use any assests against other companies. Therefore without these the solvency ratio dropped. But QD were unaware of this (Prob going back to an insurance company being run by a business man). but all this was declared in the accounts.

Get. Up. The. Yard.

[dublinfella]

Looks to me like the government saw the chance to screw a competitor of their own insurance company, and took it. Corrupt scumbags.

This despite them neither knowing about it or having any power to order it? If anything they wanted to stop it as he is quids in with FF.

If they wanted to protect VHI they would have never allowed competition

[supersarsfields]

Any joy on that link DF. Or is this another one of your lies?

[dublinfella]

There is no point arguing with you Dublinfella.  The government and the regulators let QD go to the wall and put thousands of people directly or indirectly out of work.  The company was making huge profit and had plenty of money to cover all claims (more than VHI and more than most insurance companies in the EU).  The government have been letting VHI break the regulations for 11 years and are giving them another 2 years (which will probably get expended again) to get up to the recommended level.  'VHI are having problems because BUPA took their customers' so what, if I owned a fruit and vegetable shop and went to the bank manager and said I was having solvency problems because someone up the road opened a better one do you think he would have much sympathy for me?  If there is 1 rule for the goose then there should be the same for the gander.

QD weren't huckled because of solvency. They were lagged for using these funds for other purposes which SS acknowledges is illegal.

Comparisons wth VHI and the risk equalisation policy are fundamentally wrong.

[dublinfella]

Any joy on that link DF. Or is this another one of your lies?

Link to what? QD are well known for being difficult to get claims out of and you agree with me on the cash movement.

[supersarsfields]

No one is arguing that there wasn't laws broke here. The argument is that you believe the regulator acted in the best way. I and many others disagree. Not least with how he started the admin process.

But comparisons between VHI and QD are viable. If solvency wasn't such an issue for VHI why bother putting deadlines on it and saying they would have to take action if these weren't met. As a Insurance company they are still under the regulations of the FR. And action should be taken against them if they couldn't meet these regulations. 

[supersarsfields]

Any joy on that link DF. Or is this another one of your lies?

Link to what? QD are well known for being difficult to get claims out of and you agree with me on the cash movement.

Sorry I going to call you a liar on this unless you can provide a wee bit of proof. But then this wouldn't be the first time you've came on this board spouting sh*te.

Also cash movement isn't accurate. It was issuing of guarantees that involved QD assets. No money moved.

[Maiden1]

The same regulators could go into VHI next week and see that they have been given 11 years to sort out there issues with solvency levels etc. and say tough sh*t the rules are the rules, you've been given enough time to sort the problems out, no more excuses, stop selling policies until you get it sorted out.  By the sound of it you'd be first on here saying they got what they deserve but they have used common sense in this case and said we will work with you, no one is complaining that they are doing this.  If they had the same approach with QD then there never would have been a problem of the scale there is now.

QD taking a long time to pay out claims is a complete red herring.  All insurance companies try to wait as long as possibly to pay out any claim of more than a few hundred pounds, or avoid paying out at all if possible e.g.  someone claims for whip lash in a car crash, they will be straight on to your doctor for your medical files to see if you ever had a twinge in the past.

[tyronefan]

Any joy on that link DF. Or is this another one of your lies?

Link to what? QD are well known for being difficult to get claims out of and you agree with me on the cash movement.

have had 2 substantial claims with QD in the past year and was paid within weeks with very little hassle.

[sammymaguire]

ok, I think we'll conclude that dublinfella is a WUM that is full of sh1te - all agreed say aye!

[supersarsfields]

Any joy on that link DF. Or is this another one of your lies?

Link to what? QD are well known for being difficult to get claims out of and you agree with me on the cash movement.

have had 2 substantial claims with QD in the past year and was paid within weeks with very little hassle.

It's the one thing that QD are renown for. They always worked on getting claims finalised as quickly as possible. So i think DF picked the wrong lie this time.