Asset Protection (GAP and RIPL)
When considering a total loss payout or vehicle theft settlement, the presence of a GAP policy needs to be a consideration for fraud. The possibility of a considerable GAP or RIPL payment along with vehicle finance settlement, vehicle value payout and even potential for retention of salvage, can be a considerable fraud motivator.
Due to the ensuing economic climate and cost of living rises, a GAP claim consideration cannot simply ‘piggyback’ the decision of the motor insurer.
The key fraud indicators are similar for GAP and RIPL policy claims as they are for motor policy claims fraud. We have seen:
- Staged and contrived accidents with Third Party
- Contrived accidents with untraced driver
- Staged thefts unrecovered
- Staged theft recovered with damage
With the lack of GAP Insurance database, it is imperative that the motor insurer establish the prevalence of an asset protection policy at motor policy inception and record this accordingly against customer records. It is then imperative that collaboration between the two insurers ensues when a claim arises to ensure validation.
However, if this does not occur, there are key fraud indicators that need to be considered:
- Claims history – particularly theft or own fault damage
- Policyholder suffering financial stress
- GAP policy approaching end of cover
- Questionable circumstances which give rise to loss
At ExamWorks Investigation Services, we have developed a unique, low-cost Asset Protection process that encompasses all requirements. It’s not only bespoke but also flexible and tiered.