MVIAC’s Failures Hurt Insurers & Clients – Insurer Calls for Urgent Reform

Chronic delays, political interference, and structural deficiencies are crippling the Motor Vehicle Insurance Arbitration Committee (MVIAC), warns Abdel Ruhomutally, CEO of GFA Insurance Ltd. In a scathing assessment, he alleges that inefficiency and opaque governance have eroded trust in the body, leaving policyholders and insurers in limbo.

With 83 unresolved cases at his company alone—some dating back to 2011—Ruhomutally demands immediate reforms, including modernization of legal processes, greater transparency, and an end to politically motivated appointments.

“The MVIAC’s credibility is at stake,” he told Defi Media, highlighting how backlogged disputes inflate costs for insurers and delay justice for claimants.

What is your reaction to the announcement in the National Assembly that 1,635 cases submitted to MVIAC from 2019 to 2024 have not been processed?

I was somewhat surprised to hear the announcement made in the National Assembly that 1,635 cases submitted to the Motor Vehicle Insurance Arbitration Committee (MVIAC) between 2019 and 2024 have not been processed. Over the five-year period, these cases have remained unresolved.

Based on the claims reports I received from my department, decisions from MVIAC generally take about two years after the cases are reviewed by the committee.

This significant delay has been ongoing for years, even under previous governments.

The core issue mainly involves the appointment of the committee’s presidents and vice-presidents.

Since these appointments are political decisions, they tend to take a long time. For instance, it took nearly nine months for Jacques Panglose’s appointment as president to be confirmed by the government.

Another contributing factor is the time required to draft and communicate rulings to insurance companies.

This administrative process also causes delays, but it could be addressed and streamlined more easily.

This slow process leads to irregular committee meetings and accumulated backlogs. In fact, delays of this nature have existed since the establishment of MVIAC, affecting its efficiency and effectiveness.

Do you have any unresolved cases pending for several years? Can you give an example?
Yes, GFA currently has multiple cases pending at MVIAC. As of now, there are 34 cases where we are the claimant and 49 where we are the defendant, totaling 83 cases. The oldest dates back to 2011.

Do you believe this situation has harmed the reputation of the arbitration system in the insurance sector? Why?
The no-fault claim system was introduced to streamline accident processing, avoiding delays waiting for police reports.

We simplified the claim form and introduced yellow cross markings to speed things up. MVIAC was created to accelerate insurance dispute resolution, replacing reliance on police reports and court procedures.

However, these delays can harm MVIAC’s reputation. The Supreme Court has ruled that MVIAC is a quasi-judicial body—similar to a court—but its current operations fall short due to a lack of sufficient human resources provided by the ministry.

I also want to highlight that the presence of politically affiliated lawyers within the agency complicates matters.

Some represent insurance companies, creating potential conflicts of interest—some openly, others discreetly.

Cases Pending at MVIAC

What are the practical effects of these delays on an insurance company’s internal operations?
We face several challenges managing claims, especially when a case is pending at MVIAC, affecting recoveries and payments when a client files a complaint through the agency.

These delays also cause accounting issues, as we must keep provisions and keep cases open for extended periods, complicating audits and actuarial reports.

With the implementation of IFRS 17 standards, reporting has become even more complex.

Do these delays have financial impacts on insurance companies?
Yes, there are financial consequences. When a case is at MVIAC, we miss opportunities to invest quickly and earn returns on our investments.

For clients, it’s also a financial issue—they have to wait for MVIAC to resolve their case before claiming refunds, such as for excess payments or loss-of-use claims (commonly called “garage days”).

The minister stated that MVIAC was restructured in April 2025 to clear the backlog. In your opinion, what are the key conditions for MVIAC to operate efficiently in the future?
The appointment of the president and vice-presidents must happen immediately to prevent further delays.

It’s also essential to have three to four committees meeting regularly—ideally at least once a week.

In the short term, more frequent meetings, such as twice a week, may be necessary to reduce the backlog.

Additionally, the ministry should increase MVIAC’s human and financial resources to ensure proper functioning.

Do you support legislative reforms to modernize MVIAC’s role or improve its transparency?
Beyond urgently providing more staff and funding, procedures for challenging MVIAC decisions should be simplified.

Currently, appealing a decision requires going to the Supreme Court—an expensive and complex process for both insurers and claimants.

A simpler, less costly alternative should be considered, and legislative reform would be beneficial.

Would you favour annual publication of MVIAC decisions (anonymized), similar to practices in other jurisdictions?
Absolutely. Publishing decisions, statistics, and annual reports would enhance transparency. After all, this organization uses taxpayer money, so greater openness is justified.

Source: Defi Media