CHAPTER–

DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

In the present study both primary and secondary data has been collected from
various

sources. The present chapter elaborates the data analysis interpretations of

the study.

7.1. Analysis of Primary Data of

Policyholders

Primary data has been collected from the existing motor insurance customers
and

selected motor insurance companies through questionnaires and interview.

Results of

primary data of customers are discussed in various

parts.

The first part analyses the demographic characteristic of the respondents. The
other parts

provides a descriptive analysis of data collected. A pilot survey has been

conducted

before drafting the final questionnaire that provides useful insights to the final
draft of the

questionnair
e.
The analysis is done on the basis of five parameters that are Policy, Benefits,
Premium

and Charges, Services, Claim settlement procedure and customer satisfaction.

The

questionnaire consists of thirty closed ended questions and one open ended
question

relating to the above parameters, while the second questionnaire for selected
companies

consist of seven questions which are both open and

closed ended.

The analysis provides a comparison between the satisfaction level of customers

of New

India Assurance Company Limited and ICICI Lombard General Insurance

Company

Limited
.

( 150
)
I Demographic )
Analysis NIACL
NIACL
Gende
Percent(%
r
Percent(%
Gender NIACL
ICICI
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
ICICI
Frequenc
Percent(% y
 Frequenc Frequenc
y y

Male 112 70 103 64.37

Female 48 30 57 35.62

Exhibit 7.1: Gender of

Respondents

Exhibit 7.2: Graphical representation of gender of

respondents

Interpretatio
n

Out of 160 , 112 respondents were Male and 48 were Female in New India
Assurance

Company Limited , in ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company Limited 103

respondents were male and 57 were Female that means majority of respondents
were
male in both the companies but in ICICI Lombard General Insurance Company
Limited
Gender of
respondents

Male Female

( 151
)
Female respondents were more as compared to Female respondents of New
India

Assurance Company
Limited.

Marital
 Status

Marital Status NIACL Frequenc

Frequenc y
y ICICI
NIACL Percent(%
Percent(% )
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
)

Married 91 56.87 88 55

Single 69 43.12 72 45

Exhibit 7.3: Marital status of

respondents
 Exhibit 7.4: Graphical representation of marital status of
respondents

Interpretatio
n

In NIACL 56.87 % of respondents were married and 43.12 % were single and in
ICICI

55 % respondents were married and 45 % were single, in both the companies

large

number of respondents were

married.
Marital status of
respondents

Married Single
 ( 152
)
Ag )
e NIACL
Percent(%
)
Age NIACL ICICI
Frequenc Frequenc
y y
ICICI ICICI
Percent(% Frequenc
) y
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% Frequenc
) y
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% Frequenc
y

18-28 16 10 19 11.87

28-38 27 16.87 41 25.62

38-48 34 21.25 21 13.12

48-58 45 28.12 52 32.50

58 and above 38 23.75 27 16.87

Exhibit 7.5: Age of

respondents
 Exhibit 7.6: Graphical representation of Age of
respondents

Interpretatio
n

In context of age the primary information indicates that the majority of

respondents were

in the age group of 48-58 years. In NIACL, (28.12 %) respondents were in the
age-group

of 48-58 years and in case of ICICI, (32.50 %) respondents were in the age-
group of48-
Age of the
respondents

NIACL ICICI
 ( 153
)
58 years. Lowest frequency of respondents were in NIACL (16) and in ICICI (19).
The

collected information reflect that there is the highest frequency of motor

insurance

policyholders were in the age group of 48-58 which indicates that at this age
there is

positive perception towards motor insurance and risk

coverage.

Educatio
n

Education NIACL Frequenc

y
Frequenc
ICICI
y
Percent(%
NIACL
)
Percent(%
ICICI
)
Percent(%
ICICI
)
Frequenc
ICICI
y
Percent(%
ICICI
)
Frequenc
ICICI
y
Percent(%
ICICI
)

Intermediate 14 08.75 11 06.87

Graduate 71 44.37 53 33.12

Post Graduate 52 32.50 41 25.62

Professional 15 09.37 51 31.87

Others 08 05 04 02.50
 Exhibit 7.7: Education of
respondents

Exhibit 7.8: Graphical representation of Education of

respondents
Education of
respondents

NIACL ICICI
 ( 154
)
Interpretation
In respect to educational qualification of the respondents the primary information
reveals
that in NIACL, 8.75 % acquired intermediate education level, 44.37 % were graduate,
32.50 % were Post graduate, 9.30 % were professionl and 5% were in others category
In
ICICI, 6.87 % acquired intermediate education level, 33.12 % were graduate, 25.62 %
were Post graduate, 31.87 % were professionl and 2.50 % were in others category.
From
the above it can be analyzed that the majority of sample respondents were graduate in
both the companies.In other category respondents were matric pass and high school
pass.
Occupation
Occupation NIACL
Frequency
NIACL Percent(%)
ICICI Frequency
ICICI Percent(%) Employment 52 32.50 38 23.75 Business 33 20.62 56 35
Profession 67 41.87 49 30.62 Others 08 05 17 10.62
Exhibit 7.9: Occupation of respondents
Exhibit 7.10: Graphical representation of Occupation of respondents
Occupation of respondents
NIACL ICICI
( 155 )
Interpretatio
n

In respect of occupational pattern the primary information indicates that in NIACL

32.50

% were employed, 20.62 % were businessmen, 41.87 were professionals and

5% were in

other category. In ICICI 23.75% were employed, 35% were businessmen, 30.62
% were

professionals and 10.62 % were in other category. Majority of the respondents in

both the
 category were professional, in other category some respondents were students
and some

were
unempoyed.

Annual
Income

Annual Income NIACL Frequenc

y
Frequenc
ICICI
y
Percent(%
NIACL
)
Percent(%
ICICI
)
Percent(%
ICICI
)
Frequenc
ICICI
y
Percent(%
ICICI
)
Frequenc
ICICI
y
Percent(%
ICICI
)

Below 300000 27 16.87 31 19.37

300000 to600000 64 40 38 23.75

600000 to 900000 53 33.12 39 24.37

Above 900000 16 10 52 32.50

Exhibit 7.11: Annual income of

respondents
 Exhibit 7.12:Graphical representation of Annual income of
respondents
Annual income of
respondents

NIACL ICICI

( 156
)
Interpretatio
n

Regarding the annual income of the respondents, the primary information

revealed that in

NIACL, 16.87 % of the respondents had annual income below Rs. 300000, 40 %

between Rs.300000-600000, 33.12 % had between Rs.600000-900000 and 10%

had

annual income above 900000. In ICICI, 19.37 % of the respondents had annual
income

below Rs. 300000, 23.75 % between Rs.300000-600000, 24.37 % had between

Rs.600000-900000 and 32.50 % had annual income above 900000. From the
table it can

be deducted that in NIACL majority of the respondents were in (33.12 %)

 600000-

900000 group and in ICICI majority of the respondents were in (32.50 %) above
900000

group
.

II Company and Policy basic

details

Motor Insurance
Companies

Companies No of Respondents NIACL Frequency 160 ICICI

Frequency 160

Exhibit 7.13: Respondents from selected

companies

Exhibit 7.14: Graphical representation of Number of

respondents
Number of
respondents
 NIACL Frequency ICICI
Frequency

( 157
)
Interpretatio
n

Respondents were equal in both the companies that is in NIACL 160

respondents and in

ICICI 160 respondents were taken for the purpose of the

study.

Reason for purchasing

policy

Reason NIACL Frequenc

Frequenc y
y ICICI
NIACL Percent(%
Percent(% )
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
)

Brand image 76 47.50 36 22.50

Low premium 30 18.75 12 07.50

Benifits 08 05 38 23.75
 More risk coverage 20 12.50 14 08.75
Services 26 16.25 60 37.50

Exhibit 7.15: Reason for purchasing

policy

Exhibit 7.16: Graphical representation of Reason for

purchasing policy

Interpretatio
n

In NIACL out of 160 respondents 47.50 % purchased motor insurace policy on

the basis

of brand image, 18.75 % on the basis of low premium, 5% on the basis of

benefits,
Reason for purchasing
policy
 NIACL ICICI

( 158
)
12.50% on the basis of risk coverage and 16.25 % on the basis of services. In
ICICI out

of 160, 22.50 % respondents were purchasing motor insurace policy on the basis
of

brand image, 7.50 % on the basis of low premium, 23.75 % on the basis of
benefits, 8.75

% on the basis of risk coverage and 37.50 % on the basis of services.It can be
said that in

NIACL majority of the respondents were purchasing insurance policy due to

brand image

and in ICICI due to

services.

Types of Motor Insurance

policy

Type NIACL Percent(%

)
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
NIACL
Frequenc
 y Percent(%
Frequenc )
y Percent(%
ICICI )
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )

Third party 113 70.62 66 41.25

Comprehensive 47 29.37 94 58.75

Exhibit 7.17: Types of Motor Insurance

policy

Exhibit 7.18: Graphical representation of Types of Motor Insurance

policy
Types of Motor insurance
policy
 NIACL ICICI

( 159
)
Interpretatio
n

In respect of motor insurance policy the primary data indicates that in NIACL
70.62 %

were purchasing third party legal liability policy and 29.37 % were purchasing

comprehensive/ package policy. In ICICI 41.25 % were purchasing third party

legal

liability policy and 58.75 % were purchasing comprehensive/ package policy,

which

means large number of respondents in NIACL were purchasing third party policy
and in

ICICI majority of them purchasing comprehensive

pool.

Coverage of
policy

Policy covers NIACL y

ICICI
Frequenc
Frequenc
y
y
NIACL
ICICI
Percent(%
Frequenc
)
y
ICICI
ICICI
Frequenc
Percent(%
 ) Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(% ICICI
) Percent(%
ICICI )

Two wheeler 51 31.87 49 30.62

Three wheeler 67 41.87 42 26.25

Four wheeler 25 15.62 56 35

Others 17 10.62 13 08.12

Exhibit 7.19: Coverage of

policy

Exhibit 7.20: Graphical representation of Coverage of

policy
Coverage of
policy
 NIACL ICICI

( 160
)
Interpretation
Regarding policy coverage in NIACL 31.87 % respondents were purchasing motor
insurance policy for two wheeler, 41.87 % were opting for three wheeler, 15.62 % for
four wheeler and 10.62 % were purchasing for others. In ICICI 30.62 % respondents
were purchasing motor insurance policy for two wheeler, 26.25 % were opting for three
wheeler, 35 % for four wheeler and 8.12 % were purchasing for others. Others includes
buses ,trucks and rest of the vehicles.It was revealed that majority of the vehicle
covered
under motor insurance in NIACL were three wheeler and in ICICI large number of
vehicles were under the category of four wheeler.
Mode for purchasing policy
Mode NIACL
Frequency
NIACL Percent(%)
ICICI Frequency
ICICI Percent(%) offline 103 64.37 91 56.87 Online 57 35.62 69 43.12
Exhibit 7.21:Mode for purchasing policy
Exhibit 7.22: Graphical representation of Mode for purchasing insurance policy
Mode for purchasing policy
NIACL ICICI
( 161 )
Interpretatio
n

In context of mode for purchasing motor insurance policy the primary information

indicates that majority of the respondents in NIACL and ICICI were purchasing
policy

offline that is 64.37 % and 56.87 % respectively which means that customers are
familier

with offline mode as compared to online

 mode.

Renewal of Motor insurance

policy

Renewal NIACL Frequenc

Frequenc y
y ICICI
NIACL Percent(%
Percent(% )
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
)

Yes 133 83.12 141 88.12

No 27 16.87 19 11.87

Exhibit 7.23: Renewal of Motor insurance

policy
 Exhibit 7.24: Graphical representation of Renewal of insurance
policy
Renewal of insurance
policy

NIACL ICICI

( 162
)
Interpretatio
n

Out of 160, 83.12 % respondents from NIACL and 88.12 % from ICICI were
renewing

their motor insurance policy on time but still 16.87 % from NIACL and 11.87 %
from

ICICI were not renewing their motor insurance policy on time. As compared to
NIACL

respondents ICICI respondents were more responsible in renual of motor

insurance
 policy
.

Reason for not renewing Motor Insurance Policy

on time

Reason NIACL Frequenc

Frequenc y
y ICICI
NIACL Percent(%
Percent(% )
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
)

Ignorance 24 88.88 17 89.47

Not receiving notices on time 1 03.70 1 05.26

Others 2 07.40 1 05.26

Exhibit 7.25.Reason for not renewing Motor Insurance Policy

on time
 Exhibit 7.26.Graphical representation of Reason for not renewing
insurance policy
Reason for not renewing
insurance policy

NIACL ICICI

( 163
)
Interpretation
In respect of reason for not renewing Motor Insurance Policy on time, the primary
information indicated that in NIACL 24 respondents and in ICICI 17 respondents were
not renewing due to ignorance and two respondents, one in each company were not
receiving notices on time, reason behind this that they were giving wrong phone
numbers
and wrong email id at the time of issue of the policy. In the last category that is in others
two respondents were from NIACL customer and one for ICICI, they were not renewing
their policy due to financial reason, out of which one respondent were not wasting
money
on renewing the policy.
III Benefits
No Claim Bonus on Motor Insurance Policy
No claim bonus NIACL
Frequency
NIACL Percent(%)
 ICICI Frequency
ICICI Percent(%) Yes 139 86.87 126 78.75 No 21 13.12 34 21.25
Exhibit 7.27: No Claim Bonus on Motor Insurance Policy
Exhibit 7.28.Graphical representation of no claim bonus on motor insurance
policy
No claim bonus on motor insurance policy
NIACL ICICI
( 164 )
Interpretatio
n

Regarding no claim bonus on motor insurance policy, the primary information

indicated

that in NIACL 86.87 % respondents were getting no claim bonus on their motor

insurance policy and 13.12 % were not getting getting no claim bonus on their
motor

insurance policy. In ICICI 78.75 % respondents were getting no claim bonus on

their

motor insurance policy and 21.25 % were not getting no claim bonus on their
motor

insurance policy. Reason for not getting no claim bonus was laps of policy and
they got

insurance claim
amount.

Add-on cover on motor insurance

policy

Add on covers NIACL ICICI

Frequenc Frequenc
y y
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% Frequenc
) y
 ICICI )
Frequenc ICICI
y Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(% ICICI
) Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Yes 47 29.37 69 43.12

No 113 70.62 91 56.87

Exhibit 7.29: Add-on cover on motor insurance

policy

Exhibit 7.30: Graphical representation of Add on cover on motor

insurance policy
Add on covers on motor
insurance policy
 NIACL ICICI

( 165
)
Interpretatio
n

In NIACL out of 160, 29.37 % respondents were taking add on cover and 70.62
%

respondents were not taking add on cover on their motor insurance policy.On the
other

side in ICICI out of 160, 43.12 % respondents were taking add on cover and
56.87 %

respondents were not taking add on cover on their motor insurance

policy.Reason for not

taking add on cover was, respondents were not interested in paying extra money
for

additional
benefits.

Roadside assistance NIACL y

Frequenc
Frequenc
y
y
ICICI
NIACL
ICICI
Percent(% ICICI
)
Percent(%
ICICI
)
ICICI
Percent(%
Frequenc )
 Percent(% )

Yes 21 13.12 45 28.12

No 139 86.87 115 71.87

Exhibit 7.31: Roadside assistance on motor insurance

policy

Exhibit 7.32: Graphical representation of Roadside

assistance on motor insurance policy
Roadside assistance on motor
insurance policy
 NIACL ICICI

( 166
)
Interpretatio
n

In NIACL 13.12 % respondents were taking roadside assistance on motor

insurance

policy and 86.87% respondents were not taking on their motor insurance
policy.On the

other side in ICICI, 28.12 % respondents were taking roadside assistance and
71.87 %

respondents were not taking roadside assistance on their motor insurance

policy.Reason

for not taking roadside assistance was, respondents were not interested in
paying extra

money for additional benefits, they want simple motor

policy.

Portibility NIACL Frequenc

y
Frequenc Frequenc
y y
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% ICICI
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )
 Percent(% Percent(%
) )

Yes 05 03.12 02 01.25

No 155 96.87 158 98.75

Exhibit 7.33: Usage of portibility

facility

Exhibit 7.34:Graphical representation of Usage of portibility

facility
Usage of portibility
facility
 NIACL ICICI

( 167
)
Interpretation
The primary information indicates that only 3.22 % respondents in NIACL and 1.25 %
respondents in ICICI were used the portability facility and the rest of respondents
96.87%
(NIACL) and 98.75 % (ICICI) were not interested in it. Portibility means switching from
one insurer to another without losing the benefits of policy. Both public and private life
insurance companies provide portibility facility.In NIACL reason for switching was
better service and in ICICI was high premium amount.
IV Premium
Motor Insurance Premium amount
Premium amount NIACL
Frequency
NIACL Percent(%)
ICICI Frequency
ICICI Percent(%) Below 2000 56 35 30 18.75 2000 to 4000 06 03.75 14 08.75 4000 to
6000 46 28.75 44 27.50 6000 to 8000 38 23.75 52 32.50 Above 8000 14 08.75 20
12.50
Exhibit 7.35: Motor insurance premium amount
Exhibit 7.36: Graphical representation of Motor insurance premium amount
Motor insurance premium amount
NIACL ICICI
( 168 )
Interpretatio
n

Regarding motor insurance premium amount in NIACL 35 % of respondents

were paying

premium below 2000 Rs , 3.75 % between 2000-4000 Rs, 28.75 % between

4000-6000

Rs, 23.75 % between 6000-8000 Rs and 8.75 % above 8000 Rs. On the other
 side in

ICICI 18.75% of respondents were paying premium below 2000 Rs ,8.75 %

between

2000-4000 Rs, 27.50 % between 4000-6000 Rs, 32.50 % between 6000-8000 Rs

and

12.50 % above 8000

Rs.

It was revealed that highest frequency of respondents were paying premium

below 2000

Rs in NIACL and in ICICI highest frequency of respondents were paying premium

between 6000-8000
Rs.

Reasonable y
premium ICICI
rate Frequenc
CL y
uenc ICICI
Percent(%
NIACL )
Percent(% ICICI
) Percent(%
NIACL )
Percent(% ICICI
) Percent(%
ICICI )
Frequenc ICICI
y Percent(%
ICICI )
Frequenc

Yes 147 91.87 139 86.87

No 13 08.12 21 13.12

Exhibit 7.37: Reasonable premium

 rate

Exhibit 7.38: Graphical representation of Reasonable

premium rate
Reasonable
premium rate

NIACL ICICI

( 169
)
Interpretatio
 n

In respect of reasonable premium rate, the primary data indicates that in NIACL
91.87 %

and in ICICI 86.87 % respondents were agree that their premium amount were
reasonable

according to their motor insurance poilcy. Those repondents who were not argee
that

their premium amount were reasonable with their policy were 8.12 % in NIACL
and

13.12 % in ICICI ,reason for disagee was premium amount, extra charges and
benefits.

Problem NIACL Frequenc

y
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
NIACL ICICI

Percent(% Percent(%
) )
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Frequenc
)
y

Yes 08 05 11 06.87

No 152 95 149 93.12

Exhibit .7.39: Problem while paying Motor Insurance

Premium
 Exhibit 7.40: Graphical representation of Problems during premium
payment
Problems during premium
payment

NIACL ICICI

( 170
)
Interpretatio
n

Majority of the respondents were not find any problem during premium payment,
in

NIACL it was 95 % and 93.12 % in ICICI, only 5 % in NIACL and 6.87 % in ICICI
were

find problem during premium payment the reason behind it was bounce of
cheque and

server
problem.
 V Customer Service And Terms &
Conditions

Notices from insurance Company on

time

Notices NIACL Frequenc

Frequenc y
y ICICI
NIACL Percent(%
Percent(% )
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
)

Yes 157 98.12 158 98.75

No 03 01.87 02 01.25

Exhibit 7.41: Notices from insurance Company on

time
 Exhibit 7.42: Graphical representation of Notices from insurance
company
Notices from insurance
company

NIACL ICICI

( 171
)
Interpretatio
n

The primary data indicates that 98.12 % respondents in NIACL and 98.75 %
respondents

in ICICI were receiving notices on time that means both the companies were
providing

good services to their customers. In NIACL 1.87 % and in ICICI 1.25 %

respondents

were not getting notices on time due to giving incorrect information that is giving

incorrect phone number and invalid

email id.
 Medium NIACL Frequenc
y
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
NIACL ICICI

Percent(% Percent(%
) )
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Frequenc
)
y

Sms 103 64.37 98 61.25

Phone call 41 25.62 15 09.37

Email 16 10 47 29.37

Exhibit 7.43: Medium of receiving

notices

Exhibit 7.44: Graphical representation of Medium of receiving

notices
 Medium of receiving
notices

NIACL ICICI

( 172
)
Interpretatio
n

In NIACL 64.37 % respondents were receiving notices through the medium of

sms, 25.62

% receiving notices from phone call and rest 10 % from email on the other side in
ICICI

61.25 % respondents were receiving notices through sms, 9.37 % receiving

notices from

phone call and rest 29.37 % from email. Majority of the respondents in both the

companies were receiving notices through the medium

of sms.
 Awareness of all the terms & conditions of insurance
policy

Awareness NIACL Frequenc

y
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% Percent(%
) )
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Frequenc
)
y

Yes 141 88.12 149 93.12

No 19 11.87 11 06.87

Exhibit 7.45: Awareness of terms &

conditions
 Exhibit 7.46:Graphical representation of Awareness of terms &
conditions
Awareness of terms and
conditions

NIACL ICICI

( 173
)
Interpretatio
n

In respect of awareness of all the terms and conditions of motor insurance policy
88.22 %

in NIACL and in ICICI 93.12 % respondents were aware about all the terms and

conditions, reason behind it was that some of them were responsible and some
met

accident and got claim, those who were not aware were 11.87 % in NIACL and
6.87 %

in ICICI reason behind it was just to fulfill the formality of compulsory motor
insurance
 Frequenc
as per Law. Unawareness NIACL
y
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
NIACL ICICI

Percent(% Percent(%
) )
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Frequenc )
y

Negligence 14 73.68 07 63.63

Not explained by agents 03 15.78 01 09.09

Complecated policy wordings 02 10.52 03 27.27

Exhibit 7.47: Reason for Unawareness of terms &

conditions

Exhibit 7.48: Graphical representation of Reason for unawareness of

terms & conditions
Reason for unawareness of terms and
conditions
 NIACL ICICI

( 174
)
Interpretatio
n

In NIACL 14 respondents and in ICICI 7 respondents were unaware about the

terms and

conditions of motor insurance policy due to negligence, 3 in NIACL and 1in ICICI
were

unaware because according to them agents were not explained them properly
about the

terms and conditions and 2 in NIACL and 3 in ICICI due to complicated

wordings.

Part VI Sum Assured And Claim Settlement

Issues

Range of Motor Insurance sum assured

amount

Insured amount NIACL ICICI

Frequenc
Frequenc
y
y
ICICI
NIACL
Frequenc
Percent(%
y
)
ICICI
ICICI
Percent(%
Frequenc
)
y
 ICICI )
Percent(% ICICI
) Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%

Below 50000 56 35 48 30

50000 to 100000 18 11.25 16 10

100000 to 200000 14 08.75 20 12.50

200000 to 400000 42 26.25 36 22.50

Above 400000 30 18.75 40 25

Exhibit 7.49: Motor Insurance sum assured

amount

Exhibit 7.50: Graphical representation of Sum assured

amount
Sum assured
amount
 NIACL ICICI

( 175
)
Interpretatio
n

The primary data of the respondents indicates that in NIACL 35 % of

respondents

insured their motor vehicle below 50000, 11.25 % between 50000 to 100000,
8.75 %

between 100000 to 200000, 26.25 % between 200000 to 400000 and rest 18.75
% above

400000. In ICICI 30 % of respondents insured their motor vehicle below 50000,

10%

between 50000 to 100000, 12.50 % between 100000 to 200000, 22.50 %

between

200000 to 400000 and rest 25 % above 400000.It was revealed that highest
frequency of

respondents in both the companies were insured their vehicle below

50000.

Motor Vehicle got

damage

Damage NIACL ICICI

Frequenc Frequenc
y y
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% Frequenc
) y
 ICICI )
Frequenc ICICI
y Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(% ICICI
) Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Yes 16 10 26 16.25

No 144 90 134 83.75

Exhibit 7.51: Damage of motor vehicle due to

accident

Exhibit 7.52: Graphical representation of Damage of motor vehicle due to

accident
Damage of motor vehicle due to
accident
 NIACL ICICI

( 176
)
Interpretatio
n

Regarding damage of motor vehicle due to accident in NIACL 10 % and in ICICI

16.25

% respondents vehicle got damage, 90 % in NIACL and 83.75 % were not having
these

issues.that means ratio of accident was less in both the companies which is good
for

societ
y.

Problems NIACL Frequenc

y
Frequenc ICICI
y ICICI
NIACL ICICI
Percent(% Percent(%
) )
ICICI Percent(%
ICICI )
Percent(%
Frequenc
)
y

Yes 07 43.75 09 34.61

No 09 56.25 17 65.38
 Exhibit 7.53: Problems during claim
settlement

Exhibit 7.54: Graphical representation of Problems during claim

settlement
Problems during claim
settlement
 NIACL ICICI

( 177
)
Interpretatio
n

The primary data of the respondents indicates that out of 16 and 26, in NIACL 7
and in

ICICI 9 respondents were having problems during claim settlement respectively

and the

rest that is 9 in NIACL and 17 in ICICI were not having such

issues.

Problems NIACL Frequenc

Frequenc y
y ICICI
NIACL Percent(%
Percent(% )
) ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
Frequenc )
y ICICI
ICICI Percent(%
)

Claim declined 02 28.57 03 33.33

Delayed payment 01 14.28 01 11.11

Less claim amount 02 28.57 02 22.22

Legal dispute 01 14.28 01 11.11

 Others 01 14.28 02 22.22

Exhibit 7.55: Problems during claim

settlement

Exhibit 7.56: Graphical representation of Problems during claim

settlement

Interpretatio
n

In NIACL 2 respondents were facing the problem of claim declined, 1 were

delayed

payment, 2 respondents were receiving less claim amount, 1 facing legal

disputes and 1
Problems faced during claim
settlement
 NIACL ICICI

( 178
)
in the category of others facing the problem of delay in work from police
authority.In

ICICI 3 respondents were facing the problem of claim declined, 1 were delayed
payment,

2 respondents were receiving less claim amount, 1 facing legal disputes and 2 in
the

category of others facing the problem due to delay in work from police authority.
Reason

for claim declined was not following the terms and conditions of the policy,
delayed

payments occur due to cheque bounce, accessor and surveyor reach the place
of accident

too late, less claim amount is an another issue due to mistakes by the
inexperienced staff,

legal dispute arises on the part of

court

Part VII Satisfaction

Level

In order to fulfil the objective of the research and determine the level of
satisfaction

among the policyholders of the sample companies. It was pertinent to analyse

the same.

The satisfaction level was determine by five point likert scale in the context of
parameters

like
–

1. Premium Amount

2. Premium computation method

3. Benefits offered under policy (Add on covers, Road side assistance, No

claim
bonus&
portibility)

4. Risk coverage

5. After Sa 6. le service / Customer service : Call

and queries

7. Terms & conditions of the policy

8. Claim Settlement procedure

9. Renewal of policy

10. Sum assured amount

11. Customer perception- Customers feels safe while dealing with the
insurance
compan
y

Exhibit 7.57: Customer Satisfaction

Parameter

( 179
)
As the data are Non parametric in nature Weighted Mean has been used for
comparative
analysis of public & private sector insurance companies
Public sector insurance company
Level of Satisfaction – Satisfaction level of NIACL
S.No. Particulars HS S N DS HDS WM 1- Premium Amount 96 40 06 10 08 4.25 2-
Premium computation method 60 42 36 12 10 3.25
3-
Benefits offered under policy (Add on covers, Road side assistance, No claim bonus&
portibility)
54 40 36 20 10 3.67
After Sale service / Customer service : Call
4- Risk coverage 88 54 08 06 04 4.35 5-
64 78 10 04 04 4.21
and queries 6- Terms & conditions 50 78 26 04 02 4.06 7- Claim
Settlement procedure 72 82 03 02 01 4.38 8- Renual of policy procedures 76 58 02 12
Customer feels safe while
02 4.02 9- Sum assured amount 124 16 04 10 06 4.51 10-
dealing with the

104 52 02 01 01 4.60
insurance company Mean score 4.23
Exhibit 7.58: Satisfaction level of NIACL
Source: estimates based on field survey, 5= HS- Highly satisfied, 4=S – Satisfied, 3= N
–
Neutral , 2= DS – Dissatisfied ,1= HDS – Highly dissatisfied and WM =Weighted mean.
Interpetation
The five point likert scale indicates that in case of safety the mean value of 4.60 is
maximum, reason behind it was that majority of the customers of NIACL were highly
satisfied with that, customers feel safe while dealing with NIACL the reason behind it
was brand image and public undertaking and the trust of 98 years since
1919.Customers
have faith in NIACL, they have a bonding with that and they donʻt want to change their
insurance as long as it has.
( 180 )
While the lowest value is 3.25 in case of Premium computation method, that
means some

customers of NIACL were highly satisfied, some were satisfied and some were
neutral,

dissatisfied and highly

dissatisfied.

Customers give mixed views on premium computation method. Customers want

simple

methods for premium computation, indirecty some customers were not satisfied
with

their premium amount in comparison to sum assured. The overall mean score of
NIACL

was
4.23.

Private sector insurance

company

Level of
Satisfaction

S.No. Particulars HS S N DS HDS WM

1- Premium Amount 46 51 23 23 17 3.53

2- Premium computation method 56 48 28 16 12 3.75

3- Benefits offered under policy (Add on covers,

portibility)
Road side assistance, No claim bonus & 85 71 01 02 01 4.48

4- Risk coverage 81 68 07 03 01 4.40

5- After Sale service / Customer service : Call queries

and 98 46 13 01 02 4.93

6- Terms & conditions 72 42 24 14 08 3.97

7- Claim Settlement procedure 68 59 19 09 05 4.10

8- Renual of policy procedures 83 66 09 01 01 4.43

9- Sum assured amount 90 47 02 17 04 4.26

10- Customer feels safe while dealing with the insurance

 company 64 73 09 10 04 4.14

Mean score 4.19

Exhibit 7.59: Satisfaction level of

ICICI

Source: estimates based on field survey, 5= HS- Highly satisfied, 4=S –

Satisfied, 3= N –

Neutral , 2= DS – Dissatisfied ,1= HDS – Highly dissatisfied and WM =Weighted

mean.

( 181
)
Interpretation
The five point likert scale indicates that in case of after sale services the mean value of
4.93 is maximum, reason behind it was that majority of the customers of ICICI were
highly satisfied with that, customers feel that services provided by ICICI were better in
comparison to other companies, the reason behind it was company provided quick
services by giving information and notices on time to their policyholders, through this
customers were aware about all the policy details, terms and conditions and other motor
insurance policy related issues.
On the other side the lowest value is 3.53 in case of Premium amount of ICICI, that
means customers were not very satisfied with their motor insurance premium amount,
according to them premium amount was more in comparision to their sum assured
amount. Customers give mixed views on this that some were highly satisfied, some were
satisfied, some were neutral, some were dissatisfied and highly dissatisfied. Customers
want affordable premium amount. The overall mean score of ICICI was 4.19
S.No. Particulars WM
(NIACL)
WM (ICICI) 1- Premium Amount 4.25 3.53 2- Premium computation method 3.25 3.75
3- Benefits offered under policy (Add on covers, Road side
assistance, No claim bonus & portibility)
3.67 4.48
4- Risk coverage 4.35 4.40 5- After Sale service / Customer service : Call and queries
4.21 4.93 6- Terms & conditions 4.06 3.97 7- Claim Settlement procedure 4.38 4.10 8-
Renual of policy procedures 4.02 4.43 9- Sum assured amount 4.51 4.26 10- Customer
feels safe while dealing with the insurance
company
4.60 4.14
Mean score 4.23 4.19
Exhibit 7.60: Comparative analysis of satisfaction level of NIACL and ICICI
( 182 )
Interpretatio
n

• For the purpose of comparative analysis of satisfaction level of motor

insurance

customers of both the companies that is NIACL in public

sector

and ICICI in private sector ten parameters were

used.

• The first parameter was premium amount where in NIACL Mean was 4.25
and in

ICICI Mean was 3.53, in this case mean score of public sector company
(NIACL)

was more as compared to private sector company (ICICI) that means

customers

of NIACL are more satisfied in comparison to ICICI. Reason behind it was

ICICI

customers were not interested in paying more

premium.

• On the basis of premium computation method Mean of NIACL and ICICI

were

3.25 and 3.75 respectively, the Mean of ICICI were more in comparison to
 NIACL that means ICICI customers were more satisfied with premium

computation method because ICICI companies were using advanced

techniques

of computation of premium which can be easily understood and like by the

customers especially the younger generation in comparison to

NIACL.

• The third parameter was benefits (Add on covers, Road side assistance, No
claim

bonus & portibility) under this the Mean of NIACL was 3.67 and ICICI was

4.48, Mean of ICICI customers was more in comparison to NIACL

customers,

that means customers of ICICI companies were more

satisfied.

• On the basis of risk coverage the Mean of NIACL was 4.35 and ICICI was
4.40

as we see Mean of ICICI was more, it is because customers of ICICI were

highly

satisfied with ICICI on risk

coverage.

( 183
)

• The Mean of NIACL was 4.21 and ICICI was 4.93 on after sale service
parameter

that means Mean of ICICI was more in comparison to NIACL and

customers of

ICICI were highly saisfied, the reason behind it was quick and prompt
 services

provided by ICICI companies to their

customers.

• On the basis of terms and conditions, the Mean of NIACL was 4.06 and
ICICI

was 3.97, the Mean of NIACL was high in comparison to ICICI and due to
this

the satisfaction level of NIACL customers were high the reason behind it
was

customers of NIACL were agree with all the terms and conditions of the

compan
y.

• Regarding claim settlement procedure, the Mean of NIACL was 4.38 and
ICICI

was 4.10 that means Mean of NIACL was more as compared to ICICI the

satisfaction level of NIACL customers were high in comparison to ICICI

cutomers, the reason behind it was customers of NIACL were happy with
claim

settlement procedure of their company in comparison to

ICICI.

• On renual of policy procedure, Mean of NIACL was 4.02 and ICICI was 4.43,
the

Mean of ICICI was more in comparison to NIACL and that is why

satisfaction

level of customers of ICICI on this parameter was high in comparison to

NIACL.
• In respect of sum assured the Mean of NIACL was 4.51 and in ICICI 4.26
and as

we see that Mean of NIACL was high in comparison to ICICI, so the

satisfaction

level of customers of NIACL was high because they were happy and
satisfied

with their sum assured

amount.

• And in the last the satisfaction level of customers were measured on the
basis of

safety and the Mean of NIACL was 4.60 and ICICI was 4.14 which means

( 184
)
NIACL Mean was high in comparison to ICICI and customers of NIACL
were

highly satisfied with their company , they fell safe while dealing with NIACL
,

another reason was brand image and trust of many

years.

• The overall Mean score of satisfaction level of customers of NIACLwas 4.23

and

ICICI was 4.19 and in that NIACL Mean score was more in comparison to
ICICI,

so it can be analyzed that satisfaction level of customers of NIACL were

more in

comparison to
 ICICI.

Overall Mean score of Satisfaction level of NIACL and

ICICI

Satisfaction level WM (NIACL) WM (ICICI)

Mean Score 4.23 4.19

Exhibit 7.61: Satisfaction level of NIACL and

ICICI

Exhibit .7.62: Graphical representation of Satisfaction level of NIACL and

ICICI
Satisfaction
level
 NIACL ICICI

( 185
)

7.2. Analysis of Primary Data of Motor Insurance

Companies

After conducting survey of policyholders it is pertinent to obtain the opinion from

the

sample insurance companies regarding the motor insurance policies issued by

them in

order to analyse the reason of gap existing between policyholders and

companies. The

sample company consisted of public and private sector insurance companies that
is

NIACL and ICICI respectively. The primary data was collected through well
defined

questionnare and personal interview from regional , zonal & branch manager of
selected

public and private sector insurance companies.Question were raised in respect

of claim

settlement process, assessors independent surverior renual of policy and

fake claims.

Caim
Settlement

The questions were raised about difficulties faces in claim settlement process
and the

time taken to settle the claim. Private sector insurance companies ICICI, were
facing

numerous problems in claim settlement process mainly due to frequent changes

in the

insurance policies and also due to alternation in guideline of claim settlement

process.

Primary data in case of NIACL indicates that claim settlement process is not

cumbersome for them. The analysis reveals that since private sector companies
are profit

motivated, claim settlement is quite difficult for them while public sector
companies are

welfare
oriented.

Regarding the time period of claim settlement process the primary information
indicates

that on an average NIACL takes 10-45 days for settling the claim while ICICI
Lombard

takes approx 10-35 days in completing the claim settlement process, it depends
upon the

situatio
n.

Assess
ors

Regarding assessor, question were raised from both the companies was, that the
assessors

reach the place of accident on time to assess the quantum of damages, the
answer for this

( 186
 )
question given by the officials of both the companies were same that on an
average

almost in most of the cases assessors reaches within the stipulated time as per
the

company rules but some time due to uncertainities they become late but
not always.

Renewal of
policy

In respect of renewal of motor insurance policy the primary information revealed

that in

NIACL 97 % customers were renew their motor insurance policy on time and in
ICICI 98

% were renew their policy on time. Only few were not renewing reason behind it
was that

customers forget and sometimes ignore to renew the

policy.

Fake
claims

It was asked from officials of both the companies that for the purpose of gaining
profit

customers made fake claims. In NIALC minimum 16-17 cases were there in a
year in

relation to fake claims and on the other side in ICICI minimum 18-19 cases in a
year

were there. Overall we can say that still some improvements will be needed in
both the

sectors to overcome with this

situation.
Disclosure of
facts

It was revealed that in both the companies mostly policyholders were not
disclosed all

the facts related to their policy especially in case of commercial vehicles for the
purpose

of only fulfilling the legal formality. It depends upon the perception of

policyholders.

7.3.
Conclusion

The seventh chapter deals with data analysis and its interpretations. In this two
set of

questionnnare were used for primary data, questionnnare one is for policyholders
and

questionnare two is for selected companies. Data was analysed on the basis of
statistical

tools like percentage, charts and weighted mean. It was found from the analysis
that

overall satisfaction level of customers of NIACL was high as compared to

ICICI.

( 187
)