Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers

Code of Conduct
Public Consultation

Issued on: 21 December 2023 BNM/RH/DP 029-5

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct

Explanatory Notes
1. This draft Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct (the
“Code”) is expected to be drafted with the licensed insurers and licensed
takaful operators’ (“ITOs”) and repairers’ (“Repairers”) agreement. The Code
is modelled after the Australian Motor Vehicle Insurance and Repair Industry
Code of Conduct and customised to Malaysia’s context. Specific questions
have been posed in the Code to obtain feedback on certain areas and
approaches that are being considered.
2. A series of engagements with ITOs and their associations, as well as with
representative of Repairers that are members of the Federation of
Automobile Workshop Owners’ Association of Malaysia (“FAWOAM”) were
held in the 1H of 2023 to obtain preliminary feedback on the Code. The initial
feedback received from these stakeholders have been incorporated into the
Code where relevant and appropriate.
3. In our capacity as the regulator of the insurance and takaful industry, Bank
Negara Malaysia (“BNM”) will require ITOs to abide by the requirements of
the Code, including the minimum requirements expected to be incorporated
into ITO’s Service Level Agreements (“SLAs”) with its panel of Repairers,
which are primarily aimed at ensuring improved consumer outcomes and to
enhance levels of professionalism and fair conduct in the business dealings
between ITOs with Repairers.
4. Compliance with the Code will be mandatory for panel repairers by virtue of
their SLAs with ITOs,
5. Meanwhile, the Code is expected to be voluntary standards for non-panel
repairers to abide by. As a participant to the Code, non-panel repairers agree
to the following:
a) to comply with the requirements of the Code;
b) all disputes that the non-panel repairers have with ITOs will be subject to
the independent dispute resolution framework stipulated in the Code
(paragraph 11); and
c) in the event there is a non-compliance to the Code, the non-panel
repairers may no longer be able to utilise the Independent External
Dispute Resolution (EDR process) i.e., arbitration.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

 Table of contents
1 Introduction.................................................................................................. 1
2 Legal Provisions .......................................................................................... 1
3 Principles of the Code ................................................................................. 2
4 Definitions.................................................................................................... 2
5 Obligations of ITO and Repairer .................................................................. 4
6 Panel Repairers of ITOs ............................................................................ 11
7 Estimate, Repair and Authorisation Process ............................................. 15
8 Repair Warranties...................................................................................... 16
9 Payment for Repairs .................................................................................. 18
10 Administration of the Code ........................................................................ 18
11 Independent Dispute Resolution Framework (IDRF) ................................. 20
Appendix 1 ........................................................................................................... 26
Appendix 2 ........................................................................................................... 27
Appendix 3 ........................................................................................................... 28

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 1 of 28

1 Introduction

1.1 A high level of professionalism and efficiency in the motor claims and repairs
industry would enhance public trust and confidence in the role of Insurers,
Takaful Operators (“ITOs”) and Repairers in providing such essential services.

1.2 In line with this, the Insurers and Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct
(the “Code”) has been formulated to establish minimum standards on fair,
timely and professional conduct to promote more effective collaboration
between ITOs and Repairers.

1.3 In addition to the broad principles and specific obligations on minimum

standards of fair, timely and professional services which the ITOs and
Repairers must strive to meet, the Code also provides for the establishment of
an ITOs-Repairers Independent Dispute Resolution Framework (“IDRF”) to
resolve disputes between ITOs and Repairers in a fair, transparent and timely
manner.

1.4 Notwithstanding the above, to preserve healthy competition in the motor claims
and repairs industry that contributes to fairer outcomes for consumers, the
Code does not intervene or intrude on matters pertaining to:
(a) the type of vehicle parts to be used in Repairs;
(b) the ITOs’ panel Repairer selection criteria;
(c) a compulsory choice of Repairer;
(d) requirements to allocate work among Repairers;
(e) particular conditions of guarantee;
(f) any cost components of ITOs and Repairers such as cost accounting
formula, methods of computing costs;
(g) any sales- or production-related information, including sales volume and
sales revenue target;
(h) any aspect of competitive bidding;
(i) business plans and strategies;
(j) details of engagement with suppliers, vendors, or customers; or
(k) limits or controls on production or output, or allocation of market.

2 Legal Provisions

2.1 The requirements in this Code are specified pursuant to sections 123 and 143
of the Financial Services Act 2013 (“FSA”) and section 135 and 155 of the
Islamic Financial Services Act 2013 (“IFSA”).

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 2 of 28

3 Principles of the Code

Professional and Fair Conduct

3.1 ITOs and Repairers agree to observe high standards of honesty and integrity,
and transact in good faith and comply with all relevant laws when conducting
their business with each other and in providing services to Customers.

3.2 The Code specifies minimum standards of fair conduct and transparency in
dealings between ITOs and Repairers. There should not be any alteration to
the commercial relationships between individual ITOs and Repairers, other
than as provided in this Code and in accordance with the principles of the Code.

3.3 ITOs and Repairers agree that they, their staff and their representatives shall
behave in a professional and courteous manner at all times. This includes not
engaging in, condoning, or permitting behaviour that is offensive, harassing,
threatening, inappropriate, abusive, bullying or intimidating.

Effective and Transparent Dispute Resolution Process

3.4 The Code shall provide for fair, transparent and timely dispute resolution
processes to address disputes which may arise between individual ITOs and
Repairers.

3.5 ITOs and Repairers shall seek to resolve their disputes in accordance with the
processes set out in paragraph 11 of the Code to avoid protracted delays in the
motor vehicle claims process to ensure improved outcomes for consumers1.

4 Definitions

4.1 In this Code:

“Administrator” refers to the Administrator established in accordance with

paragraph 10 of this Code;

“Applicant” refers to the Person who initiates the dispute resolution process as
set out in paragraph 11 of the Code;

1 An example of poor consumer outcomes which this Code aims to prevent is the unfair practice of
holding the consumer’s repaired Motor Vehicle at the workshop for extended periods pending the
resolution of protracted disputes between the ITO and Repairer on claims settlement matters.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 3 of 28

“Claimant” refers to a Policy Owner/Takaful Participant insured or covered by

an insurance Policy/Takaful Certificate, as the case may be, or a person who
has a claim against such the Policy Owner/Takaful Participant;

“Code” refers to the Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct

including any changes made thereto;

“Customer” refers to a Policy Owner, Takaful Participant and/or Claimant;

“External Dispute Resolution” or “EDR” refers to the independent external

dispute resolution process which is carried out through Arbitration 2 under
paragraph 11.3 of the Code;

“Internal Dispute Resolution” or “IDR” refers to Internal Dispute Resolution

process established by an ITO under paragraph 11.2 of the Code;

“Industry” refers to the Motor Vehicle insurance/Takaful and motor repair

(including motor smash repair) industries in Malaysia;

“In-house Assessor” refers to an ITO’s personnel who evaluates repair

estimates for the purpose of apprising claims settlements by the ITO. For the
avoidance of doubt, this does not include adjusters registered under subsection
2(1) of the FSA;

“Insurer” refers to general insurers licensed under the FSA and which, in the
course of its business, engages or authorises Repairers to perform Repairs to
Motor Vehicles;

“Motor Vehicle” refers to a motor vehicle insured or covered for damage under
a Policy/Takaful Certificate;

“Panel Repairer” refers to a Repairer who is a member of ITO’s Panel Repairers

Scheme;

“Parties” refers to the Applicant and the Respondent to a dispute arising under
paragraph 11 of the Code;

“Person” refers to an individual or entity within the Industry;

“Policy” refers to a Motor Vehicle insurance policy for a Motor Vehicle issued
by an Insurer, who is a participant to the Code;

2 Refers to a private form of dispute resolution process presided over by an appointed arbitrator and in
which the award is final and binding.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 4 of 28

“Policy Owner” refers to an individual or entity who holds a Policy for a Motor
Vehicle with an Insurer;

“Presentation” refers to the visual appearance of the Repair performed on the

Motor Vehicle;

“Registered Adjuster” refers to a registered person carrying on adjusting

business as defined under subsection 2(1) of the FSA;

“Repair” refers to any work done by a Repairer to fix a Motor Vehicle including
any of its components, systems or parts, where the work is insured or covered
by a Policy/Takaful Certificate and where a claim is or will be made by a
Claimant. Such work may include but is not limited to the following:
(a) dismantling or assembling;
(b) part or component replacement, adjustment, modification, installation or
fitting; or
(c) painting;

“Repairer” refers to appointed Repairers that handle Repairs of accident Motor

Vehicles in Malaysia;

“Respondent” refers to the Person defending against the Applicant's complaint;

“Takaful Certificate” refers to a Motor Vehicle takaful certificate for a Motor

Vehicle issued by a Takaful Operator, who is a participant to the Code;

“Takaful Operator” refers to a general takaful operator licensed under the IFSA
which, in the course of its business, engages or authorises Repairers to perform
Repairs to Motor Vehicles; and

“Takaful Participant” refers to an individual or entity who holds a Takaful

Certificate for a Motor Vehicle with a Takaful Operator.

5 Obligations of ITO and Repairer

5.1 ITOs’ Obligations

(a) ITOs shall authorise Repairs with the following objectives of:
(i) restoring the safety, structural integrity, Presentation and utility of the
Motor Vehicle; and
(ii) fulfilling their obligations to the Policy Owner/Takaful Participant in
accordance with the provisions of their Policy/Takaful Certificate, the
Specification Letters and Policy Documents issued by BNM including

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 5 of 28

- Policy Document on Claims Settlement Practices (“PD on CSP”)3

and Policy Document on Fair Treatment of Financial Consumers.

(b) Where there is no Service Level Agreement (“SLA”) in place between the
ITO and the Repairer, the ITO shall, as far as practicable –
(i) include an obligation for the Repairer to abide by the Code in the
agreement between the ITO and the Repairer; and
(ii) the agreement shall be documented prior to approving the Repairs.

(c) ITOs shall not require Repairers to provide estimates or carry out Repairs
that are not in accordance with the following:
(i) any guidelines which have been or may be introduced by relevant
authorities, including but not limited to the Guidelines on Application
of Structural Change for Vehicle Panel (Accident)4 issued by
Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan (“JPJ”);
(ii) methods that are consistent with standard Motor Vehicle warranty
conditions and manufacturer’s technical specifications; or
(iii) any mandatory specifications and/or standards required by the law,
having regard to the age and condition of the Motor Vehicle.

(d) ITOs’ approval of Repair estimates and Repairs carried out by Repairers
should be guided by the Malaysian Standard on Motor Vehicle
Aftermarket: Smash Repair Requirements issued by Jabatan Standard
Malaysia 5.

(e) With respect to dealings with Repairers in relation to a Repair, ITOs shall
do the following:
(i) provide Repairers with relevant and sufficient details relating to the
insurance/takaful claim that the Repairer requires in order to prepare
an estimate or undertake the Repair;
(ii) consider estimates submitted by Repairers in a fair, transparent and
timely manner, and shall not refuse to consider the estimate on
unreasonable grounds such as rejecting a claim without providing
valid reasons or solely on the basis that estimates on a
supplementary claim for damages had not been discovered during
the initial vehicle inspection; and
(iii) pay the Repairers the agreed amount for all completed Repairs that
have been authorised or requested by the ITO in a timely manner.

(f) ITOs shall work together with Repairers to do the following:

(i) resolve Customer’s complaints that relate to ITO’s decision on the

3 To be issued by BNM in 1H 2024. Upon issuance, the PD on CSP will be publicly available and will
supersede the existing Guidelines on Claims Settlement Practices.
4 Issued in April 2019 and any subsequent amendments to it or any instruments replacing it.
5 The Smash Repair Requirements is in the process of finalisation by Jabatan Standard Malaysia and

is expected for issuance in Q1 2024.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 6 of 28

approval amount or scope of work in a timely and transparent

manner; and
(ii) promote seamless consumer experience through digitalisation
efforts, as far as practicable 6.

(g) ITOs shall ensure that their In-house Assessors comply with the
minimum requirements on professionalism and fair conduct as provided
in the PD on CSP, as follows:
(i) ITOs shall ensure that their In-house Assessors are –
(A) adequately qualified and competent to carry out objective
assessments on the cause and circumstances of a loss and to
ascertain the quantum of the loss in relation to a motor
insurance/takaful claim;
(B) provided with relevant and continuous training to keep pace with
the latest technical, technological, environmental and other
developments in the motor ecosystem in order to deliver high-
quality claims assessments;
(C) guided by clear internal policies and procedures to ensure that
the claims assessment process is conducted in an independent,
objective and professional manner;
(D) subject to adequate monitoring and controls to avoid any
conflict-of-interest situations that can result in unfair outcomes
for policy owners/takaful participants. This includes ensuring
that the remuneration and incentives provided to In-house
Assessors are not tied to claims costs; and
(E) acting with due care and diligence when conducting
investigations and assessments of loss;
(ii) With respect to sub-paragraphs (i)(A) and (B), ITOs should be guided
by the qualification and training requirements under the Policy
Document on Registration Procedures and Requirements on
Professionalism of Adjusters 7;
(iii) ITOs shall establish a mechanism 8 to ensure new and inexperienced
In-house Assessors are closely supervised by a senior In-house
Assessor 9 for at least 1 year before they are allowed to conduct
adjusting work independently;
(iv) ITOs shall ensure that claims assessments prepared by their In-
house Assessors contain sufficient details on key information, such
as the facts, assumptions, methods, sources of information and
databases used or referred to in producing its final assessment; and

6 For example, reducing reliance or requiring the submission of physical copies of documents in favour
of digital documentation.
7 Issued by BNM on 1 June 2023 and published on the BNM’s website (Policy Document on Registration

Procedures and Requirements on Professionalism of Adjusters).

8 This mechanism must be documented and subject to periodic review to ensure its relevance and

adequacy for this purpose.

9 Senior In-house Assessor refers to in-house assessor who has acquired at least 5 years of adjusting

experience in the subject matter being assessed.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 7 of 28

(v) ITOs shall ensure that claims assessments produced by their In-
house Assessors with less than 5 years of adjusting work experience
are reviewed and signed-off by a senior In-house Assessor.

Question 1
Are there any other obligations on ITOs that need to be provided apart
from those proposed under paragraphs 5.1 (a) to (g)? Please provide
clear justifications and the rationale for any additional obligations you
view as important to impose on ITOs.

5.2 Repairers’ Obligations

(a) The objectives of Repairers in carrying out Repairs are as follows:
(i) to restore the safety, structural integrity, Presentation and utility of
the Motor Vehicle; and
(ii) to fulfil their obligations to the ITOs under the provision of the
applicable contract of repair in accordance with the SLA with the ITO.

(b) The Repair estimates and Repairs carried out by Repairers –

(i) shall be in accordance with the following:
(A) any guidelines which have been or may be introduced by
relevant authorities, including but not limited to the Guidelines
on Application for Vehicle Panel Structure Repair or Conversion
(Accident Cases) issued by JPJ;
(B) methods that are consistent with standard Motor Vehicle
warranty conditions and manufacturer’s technical
specifications; or
(C) any mandatory specifications and/or standards required by the
law, having regard to the age and condition of the Motor Vehicle;
and

(ii) should be guided by Malaysian Standard on Motor Vehicle

Aftermarket: Smash Repair Requirements issued by Jabatan
Standard Malaysia;

Question 2
(a) In relation to sub-paragraph 5.2(b)(i)(B), we wish to seek your
feedback whether Repairers:
(i) have access to information on methods that are consistent
with standard Motor Vehicle warranty conditions and
manufacturer’s technical specifications; and
(ii) have capabilities (i.e. in terms of personnel skills, facilities
and equipment) to handle repair in accordance to the
manufacturer’s technical specifications?
(b) In relation to sub-paragraph 5.2(b)(i)(C), are there any lawful
mandatory specification and/or standards that provides
requirements relating to repair estimates or Repairs carried out
by Repairers?

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 8 of 28

(c) In relation to sub-paragraph 5.2(b)(ii), we propose to include the

following requirement i.e., the estimates and repair works carried
out by Repairers should be guided by Malaysian Standard on
Motor Vehicle Aftermarket: Smash Repair Requirements issued
by Jabatan Standard Malaysia. In this regard, we would like to
seek your feedback on whether sub-paragraph 5.2(b)(ii) should
be included in the Code. If you disagree with this proposal, please
provide clear justifications to support your view.

(c) With respect to dealing with ITOs in relation to Repairs, Repairers shall do
the following:
(i) prepare estimates that provide an accurate and appropriate account
of the scope of Repairs as well as ensure that all Repairs are carried
out in a safe, ethical, timely and professional manner and in
accordance with the method of Repair and the parts specified and
approved by the ITO;
(ii) refer to the centralised database for motor repairs estimations of
Motordata Research Consortium Sdn Bhd. (“MRC”) or any other
credible database used by the ITO to facilitate repairs estimations,
including replacement parts prices and labour times; and
(iii) not dismantle a Motor Vehicle for the purpose of preparing an
estimate or report unless requested or authorised to do so by the
ITO.

(d) Repairers shall not commence any Repair without obtaining the relevant
ITO’s agreement and authorisation to proceed. Where there is no SLA in
place between the ITO and the non-panel Repairer, the non-panel
Repairers shall do the following:
(i) agree to abide by the Code in carrying out the Repairs as authorised
by the ITO; and
(ii) the agreement shall be documented prior to commencing the
Repairs.

(e) Repairers shall provide equivalent standard spare parts related to the
Repairs and reasonable warranty for the affected spare parts.

(f) Repairers shall repair Motor Vehicles in a timely manner and keep the
Claimant and the ITO informed of the completion time or any changes to
the Repair estimate, including any hidden damage that requires the
submission of supplementary claims.

(g) Repairers should support ITOs digitalisation initiatives to promote

seamless consumer experience 10.

10 For example, reducing reliance on and requiring physical copies of documents, where possible,
particularly when digital copies are available.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 9 of 28

Question 3
In relation to paragraph 5.2 (f) and (g), do you foresee any operational
issues or challenges in implementing the requirements? If yes, please
elaborate and provide clear explanations to support your view.

(h) Repairers shall ensure that staff assigned to repair works –

(i) have the relevant qualifications and/or experience as specified in the
Malaysian Standard on Motor Vehicle Aftermarket: Smash Repair
Requirements issued by Jabatan Standard Malaysia; and
(ii) undertake repair works and conduct themselves in a professional
manner in keeping with the relevant requirements of the automotive
industry including those set by the relevant authorities.

(i) Repairers shall handle Customer complaints promptly, fairly and

effectively. To this end, Repairers shall –
(i) have in place proper processes and documented procedures for
complaints handling, including clearly identified contact points for the
proper handling of complaints from Customers. The procedures shall
be clear, easily understood and readily accessible by Customers;
(ii) escalate a complaint to the ITO - within 1 working day from the date
of receipt of the complaint or date of inspection of the vehicle by the
Repairer (where an inspection is required) - if the complaint relates
to the ITO’s decision on the approval, claims settlement amount or
scope of work. In relation to this, the Repairer shall work together
with the ITO to resolve the Customer’s complaints;
(iii) address each complaint in an objective and timely manner, and shall
adhere to the following timelines in its complaints handling:
(A) Repairers shall inform the Customer of the outcome no later
than 5 working days from the date of receipt of the complaint;
(B) where the case is complicated or involves complex issues that
require further investigation, the Repairer shall inform the
Customer in writing on reasons for the delay and the estimated
time needed to resolve the complaint; and
(C) in any event, Repairers shall convey to the Customer a decision
on the complaint no later than 30 calendar days from the date
the complaint was first lodged.

Question 4
(a) In relation to paragraph 5.2(i), what are your views on the timelines
stipulated for handling of Customer complaints by Repairers? If you
disagree with any of the timelines above, please suggest
reasonable timelines supported with relevant data, illustrations, or
justifications.
(b) In addition to the handling of Customer complaints by Repairers,
Repairers should consider establishing a credible and transparent
online platform for submission and compilation of data on customer
feedback or satisfaction. This would include:
i. Transparent rating system for customer’s to providing ratings

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 10 of 28

on services of repairers, which can be publicly accessed; or

ii. Online channel for customers to submit feedback forms after
completion of repair works; and
iii. Online channels for filing of complaints and to monitor status
of complaints.
What are your views on the proposal above? Please provide clear
justifications to support your view.

5.3 Motor parts trade discounts, labour rate and labour time
(a) The motor parts trade discounts and labour rate per hour should be
negotiated between ITOs and Repairers and the agreement on this matter
should be stipulated in the relevant SLA between ITOs and Repairers. If
these terms are not provided in the SLA, or where no SLA is signed
between the ITO and the non-panel Repairer, the ITO shall ensure that
the parts trade discounts and labour rate per hour are negotiated, and the
agreement shall be documented, before the commencement of the
Repair. In this regard, the determination of the hourly labour rate shall take
into consideration the types of vehicles.

(b) Where the labour time for a Repair is unable to be determined using the
MRC database, ITOs and Repairers shall agree on the appropriate
reference point to determine the standard hours for repair work. This may
include recommendations by the appointed registered adjuster or
reference to a credible database used by the ITOs, and this agreement
shall be disclosed in the SLA. Where no SLA is signed between the ITO
and the non-panel Repairer, the ITO shall ensure that the reference point
used to determine the standard hours for repair work is discussed with the
non-panel Repairer, and the agreement shall be documented, before the
commencement of the Repair.

(c) With respect to paragraph 5.3(b), the ITOs shall ensure that the database
provider being referred to determine the standard hours for a Repair is
credible, which adheres to the following principles:
(i) Resilient: The database provider has a secure database and is able
to preserve the continuity of critical services in adverse situations;
(ii) Interoperable: The database provider’s system is easily linked or
integrated with other ITO-related systems; and
(iii) Comprehensive: The database provides wide coverage and data on
labour times that allows for better and faster comparison of prices to
reduce price subjectivity.

5.4 ITOs and/or Repairers shall not –

(a) make misleading or deceptive statements about the quality, capability or
timeliness of a Repairer or group of Repairers;

(b) make misleading or deceptive statements about the quality, safety or

timeliness of Repairs against an ITO or the approach the ITO uses to
allocate Repairs or manage claims; and

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 11 of 28

(c) make statements or engage in actions or behaviour designed or intended

to prevent or discourage a Customer from having any necessary
rectification work to their Motor Vehicle following a Repair undertaken by
the Repairer who had completed the original Repairs, as the case may be.

6 Panel Repairers of ITOs

6.1 Notification of Opportunities to Apply for Membership to become Panel

Repairers of ITOs
(a) ITOs that have Panel Repairers Schemes (PRS) shall document and
publish 11 the criteria for membership 12 of the PRS.
(b) ITOs shall establish mechanisms for Repairers to register their interest in
joining the PRS. These mechanisms shall be documented and be made
publicly available.
(c) ITOs shall also confirm a Repairer’s registration of interest in writing and
provide details of the criteria used by the ITO to select a member of its
PRS.

6.2 Disclosure of information on PRS

(a) ITOs shall provide Repairers who are members of its PRS with the
following:
(i) the criteria and requirements for retaining their membership status;
(ii) the key performance indicators (KPIs) used to evaluate the
performance of the Repairer;
(iii) regular feedback on the Repairer’s performance against the KPIs;
and
(iv) the circumstances under which a Repairer’s status in the PRS can
be changed, including being terminated or suspended.

6.3 Terms of Service Level Agreement

(a) ITOs shall enter into a SLA with each Repairer that has been selected to
become a member of its PRS.
(b) At minimum, the SLA shall provide for, but is not limited to, the following:
(i) the period of the SLA between ITOs and Panel Repairers, which shall
be fair and reasonable, that is, not less than 3 years. This is intended
to give due consideration to the time and investment a Repairer has
to make to gain and/or maintain their status as a Panel Repairer with
the ITOs;
(ii) disclosure of information as set out in paragraph 6.2 of this Code;

11 For example, publication on the publicly accessible pages of an ITO's websites.

12 The criteria may include minimum qualification and experience of relevant technicians, as well as
minimum requirements relating to site area, facilities, security at workshop and insurance coverage
requirements.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 12 of 28

(iii) for own damage claims, ITOs reserve the right to require their Panel
Repairers to carry out repairs expediently, in any case, not more than
10 working days from the date of approval of repair estimates by the
ITO. The timeline specified is subject to exceptional circumstances
such as extensive damage to the vehicle or non-availability of parts;
(iv) ITOs reserve the right to require their Panel Repairers to retain all
replacement parts for re-inspection for a period of 30 calendar days
from the date of completion of repair works;

Question 5
(a) In relation to sub-paragraph 6.3(b)(iv), concerns were raised that
the requirement for Repairers to retain the replacement parts for 30
calendar days is too long and not practical due to issues such as
space constraint to store the damaged parts, incentivising theft as
well as contributing to mosquito breeding and rodent infestations
issues. As such, reducing the timeline for this may be warranted.
Please suggest a reasonable timeline for Repairers to retain
replacement parts for reinspection purposes, supported with
relevant data, illustrations, or justifications. The suggested timeline
should consider interest of all relevant parties involved.
(b) In line with the Malaysian Standard on Motor Vehicle Aftermarket:
Smash Repair Requirements to be issued by Jabatan Standard
Malaysia, we are considering ensuring proper disposal of ATL
motor vehicle and as far as practicable 13, to send the ATL vehicle
to the Authorised Automotive Treatment Facility (AATF) within 5
working days after deregistration.

Depending on the arrangement between ITOs and repairers, ITOs

are usually the party responsible for sending the ATL vehicle to the
AATF. However, in circumstances where the ATL vehicle is sold to
the repairer and where an agreement has been reached between
the ITO and repairer, the repairer is usually responsible for sending
the ATL vehicle to the AATF. In view of the above, additional
obligations will be imposed on both the ITOs and repairers (as an
obligation under the SLA under this Code), to require the
responsible party to ensure timeliness on surrendering of ATL
vehicles to the AATF within 5 working days after deregistration of
the ATL vehicle.
(i) Please provides your views, supported by clear justification, on
the appropriateness of requiring ITOs or repairers (as relevant)
to serve as the responsible party for sending ATL vehicles to
the AATF.

13 The relevant party may consider other means of proper disposal of ATL vehicle where the option of
sending the ATL vehicle to AATF is not available.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 13 of 28

(ii) Please provide your views, supported by clear justification, on

whether the proposed 5 working days is reasonable; and
(iii) Do you foresee any challenges in operationalising this
requirement? If yes, please suggest measures to overcome
the challenges identified.

(v) specific, measurable and relevant KPIs that include KPIs on the
following:
(A) quality of repair work;
(B) accuracy of repair estimate quotes; and
(C) customer complaints and feedback;
(vi) an obligation for the Panel Repairer to do the following:
(A) comply with the applicable standards and requirements
imposed by the relevant authorities such as JPJ’s Guidelines
on Application for Vehicle Panel Structure Repair or
Conversion (Accident Cases); and
(B) be guided by Malaysian Standard on Motor Vehicle
Aftermarket: Smash Repair Requirements issued by Jabatan
Standard Malaysia, in carrying out its smash repair works;
(vii) circumstances or events which can result in the removal of a
Repairer from the ITO’s panel, including in the event there is
evidence of collusion involving the Repairer;
(viii) avenues for a Panel Repairer to resolve any disputes with the ITO
on actions taken by the ITO in response to the following:
(A) the failure of a Panel Repairer to meet the obligations under
the SLA or to achieve the performance criteria or standard as
agreed upon between the ITO and the Panel Repairer; and
(B) non-compliance with any standards or turnaround time set out
in CSP PD, where applicable;
(ix) an obligation for the Panel Repairer to abide by the Code 14;
(x) a requirement for Panel Repairer to notify the ITO on any change
in the business ownership structure of the Panel Repairer within 14
workings days from the date of change of ownership. Related to
this, the ITO shall determine whether a new evaluation of
membership is necessary;
(xi) the termination clauses as set out in paragraph 6.4 of this Code;
and
(xii) the execution of this SLA shall not conflict with any introduction,
imposition or variation of any laws, rules, regulations, directives or
any requirement by authorities. The parties hereby agree to be
bound by any notice on changes arising from any laws, rules,
regulations, directives or any requirement by authorities.

14 Subject to the final amendments made by the industry with the agreement of all stakeholders.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 14 of 28

Question 6
(a) In relation to sub-paragraph 6.3(b)(i), please provide your views on
whether the proposed minimum period of 3 years is reasonable. If
not, please provide suggestions supported with clear justifications.
(b) In relation to sub-paragraph 6.3(b)(xi), please provide your view on
whether the proposed timeline on the notification of ITO i.e. within
14 working days from the date of change of ownership is
reasonable?

(c) The terms and conditions of the SLA shall take into consideration the
Panel Repairers’ feedback on matters such as parts price discounts and
hourly labour rate and be subject to periodical review.

Question 7
(c) Are there any suggestions on additional areas under paragraph 6.3
that need to be covered or specific requirements that you disagree
with? Please support your responses with clear justifications.

6.4 Termination of SLA

(a) An ITO may review its business arrangement with their Panel Repairer,
including the termination of panelship, in the event that the Panel
Repairer –
(i) becomes a bankrupt or is insolvent 15;
(ii) is convicted of a serious criminal offence;
(iii) has been engaged in fraudulent activities, particularly in connection
with the operation of the Panel Repair business, or has engaged in
any other types of serious misconduct 16;
(iv) committed a breach of SLA requirements. In the occurrence of such
breach, an ITO shall:
(A) notify the Panel Repairer as soon as possible and inform the
Panel Repairer what the ITO requires the Panel Repairer to do
in order to remedy the breach; and
(B) allow the Panel Repairer to remedy the breach within 30
calendar days.
If the breach is remedied in accordance with sub-paragraph
6.4(a)(iv)(A) above, the ITO cannot terminate the SLA because of
that breach unless it is a recurring matter; or
(v) failed to meet the performance criteria or standard provided in the
SLA. However, this is subject to ITOs providing a written notice to
inform the Panel Repairer on the details of the breach and provide

15 Refers to company becoming bankrupt.

16 Examples of serious misconduct include but are not limited to submission of false claims, collusion
between repairer and customer to manipulate the circumstances of accident, replace new with used
parts.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 15 of 28

the Panel Repairer with a reasonable time to meet the performance

criteria or standards.

(b) With the exception of the expiry of the SLA term and except where a
cause of termination under paragraph 6.4(a) above is triggered, an ITO
shall not unreasonably terminate the SLA without due notice. As such,
ITOs shall at minimum provide 6 months’ notice of its intention to
terminate the SLA while providing explicit grounds and reasons for such
proposed termination.

(c) ITOs shall give Panel Repairers a reasonable opportunity to make a

representation to the ITO within 10 working days from the date of notice
of its intention to terminate the SLA. Upon expiry of the 10 working days’
period and having considered the representation made by the Panel
Repairer, the ITO shall decide whether to proceed with the termination or
to retain the Panel Repairer’s membership status. In this regard, the ITO
shall give the Panel Repairer a written notice of the decision, and the
decision shall take effect from the date specified in the notice.

(d) A Panel Repairer may terminate the SLA by giving the ITOs at least 6
months’ notice while providing explicit grounds and reasons for such
proposed termination.

Question 8
(a) Are there any suggestions on additional areas under paragraph 6.4 that
need to be covered or specific requirements that you disagree with?
Please support your responses with clear justifications.
(b) In relation to paragraph 6.4(b), please provide your views on the
reasonable period proposed for ITO to provide the notice of termination
to Panel Repairers.
(c) Do you anticipate any issues or challenges in relation to the
requirements on termination of panelship by ITOs under sub-paragraphs
6.4(a)(iv) and (a)(v) and 6.4(b)? Please support your responses with
clear justifications or explanations.

7 Estimate, Repair and Authorisation Process

7.1 Where estimates are sought:

(a) ITOs and Repairers shall ensure the estimation process is fair, transparent
and timely;

(b) ITOs and Repairers shall ensure that estimates are comprehensive,
complete and inclusive of all ascertainable damage;

(c) In determining whether a damaged part of a Motor Vehicle needs to be

replaced or repaired, factors for considerations should include the severity
of the damage and safety of the Motor Vehicle after repair. With respect

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 16 of 28

to this, consideration to replace a damage part should not be based on

the age of the Motor Vehicle or costs to the ITO;

(d) ITOs shall ensure that Repairers are provided with access to view the
assessments and recommendations of Registered Adjusters or In-house
Assessors on motor claim estimates17 via the claims estimating systems;

(e) In the event a Repairer does not have access to the claims estimating
systems and submits their motor claim estimates manually, the ITO shall
provide a copy of the claims assessments and recommendations of the
Registered Adjuster or In-house Assessor to the Repairer; and

(f) With respect to paragraphs 7.1 (d) and (e), for the avoidance of doubt, the
provision of access to the claims assessments and recommendations of
the Registered Adjuster or In-house Assessor provided to the Repairer
may:
(i) be limited to repair estimates and areas relevant to deriving the repair
estimate only; and
(ii) exclude confidential information, such as information relating to
suspected fraud which require further investigations.

Question 9
(a) What are your views on Repairers being provided access to see
the claims assessments and recommendations of the Registered
Adjuster or In-house Assessor relating to repair estimates and
areas relevant to deriving the repair estimate?
(b) Are there any other key areas of the assessment or
recommendation above that is required for Repairers to facilitate
better claims processing and timely repair works?

8 Repair Warranties 18

8.1 Repairers shall provide the necessary warranty for workmanship as stipulated
in paragraph 7.5 of the Malaysian Standard on Motor Vehicle Aftermarket:
Smash Repair Requirements issued by Jabatan Standard Malaysia as follows:

17 In relation to parts and labour.

18 ITOs shall reflect the requirements under paragraphs 8.1 and 8.2 in its SLA with Panel Repairers.
With respect to non-panel Repairers, where no SLA is in place between the ITO and the non-panel
Repairer, the ITO shall, as far as practicable, obtain the Repairer’s agreement to abide by the Code
and such agreement shall be documented.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 17 of 28

(a) Body Panel Repair – Minimum 6 months or 5,000km (whichever

comes first)
Body panel repairs are warrantied against shrinking, leaking or cracking.
The Repairer shall not be responsible for the cracking of old body filler on
previous repairs.

(b) Structural Replacement – Minimum 6 months or 5,000km (whichever

comes first)
All materials used in the structural panel replacement are warrantied.
However, if additional or hidden damage which affect the performance of
the Motor Vehicle is found during or after the smash repair process, the
Motor Vehicle owner/customer should be responsible for any additional
cost required to make the necessary repairs. This warranty is voided
should the repaired Motor Vehicle be involved in a subsequent accident,
or if structural problem results from an original equipment manufacturer
(“OEM”) design flaw, or if the Motor Vehicle is affected subsequently by
natural disaster events, such as submersion in a flood. The Motor Vehicle
shall be de-registered and sent to an Authorised Automotive Treatment
Facilities (“AATF”).

(c) Rust Repair – Minimum 6 months or 5,000km (whichever comes first)

The Repairer shall not be responsible of corrosion cause by dirt and
moisture accumulating due to automotive designs.

(d) Surface Repairs – Minimum 6 months or 5,000km (whichever comes

first)
The Repairer shall cover surface repair warranty including dent, crack,
burr, sharp edge and related surface defect.

(e) Painting Warranty – Minimum 6 months or 5,000km (whichever

comes first)
Panel painting is warrantied against cracking, peeling, delamination,
blister, blemish or orange peel. The Repairer shall not offer a warranty on
the paint of any area where a motor vehicle owner/customer did their own
body work as noted on the repair order.

8.2 Warranty on replacement parts and components

Repairers shall provide a warranty on parts and components as follows:
(a) Reuse parts and components – not less than 30 calendar days;
(b) Repair parts and components – not less than 45 calendar days; and
(c) New or remanufactured parts and components – not less than 90
calendar days or as provided by the manufacturer, distributor, supplier or
importer of the parts, whichever is longer.

Question 10
(a) What are your views on Repairers providing warranty on new or
remanufactured parts as provided by the manufacturer, distributor,
supplier or importer of parts?

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 18 of 28

(b) Are there any circumstances where manufacturer, distributor,

supplier or importer of the parts do not provide warranty on new or
remanufactured parts and components? If yes, please provide
clear explanation on those circumstances.

9 Payment for Repairs

9.1 ITOs shall make full payment to the Claimant or to his or her authorised
representative, as the case may be, within 7 working days –
(a) from the date of receipt of the acceptance of offer or Discharge Voucher
and all relevant documents; or
(b) from the receipt of the sealed court order in relation to payment of court
judgement sum.

9.2 For the avoidance of doubt, with respect to own damage claims, the ITO may
make payment of claims referred to under paragraph 9.1 to the Repairer
handling the own damage claim.

10 Administration of the Code

10.1 The Code shall be administered by an Administrator.

10.2 The Chairperson of the Administrator shall be responsible for ensuring

adequate administrative support for the Administrator’s activities, including
sufficient resources.

10.3 The Administrator’s key responsibilities include the following:

(a) responding to queries on the interpretation of any requirements in this
Code 19;

(b) monitoring compliance with the Code. This includes the following:

(i) receiving and handling information relating to alleged breaches of

the Code, which includes ITO’s or Repairer’s failure to carry out their
obligations under this Code;
(ii) determining if any non-compliance with the Code should lead to the
removal of parties as a participant to the Code; and
(iii) publishing an aggregated statement detailing results, findings and
outcomes of the independent EDR, if necessary;

19 This is intended for the Administrator to handle the queries as the first stage. Only where there are
disagreements raised by either ITO or Repairer which the Administrator is unable to resolve, such
queries should be escalated for BNM’s review.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 19 of 28

(c) submitting a quarterly report to BNM detailing the parties involved,

quantum, nature and outcome of disputes raised under the independent
EDR process;

(d) managing funding obtained from the general ITO industry for the
administration of the Code and independent EDR process;

(e) developing a framework for the appointment, establishment and operation

of a national panel of Arbitrators20 in respect to the independent EDR
process; and

(f) ensuring that periodic reviews on the operation of the Code is carried out
where the Administrator shall –
(i) conduct an initial internal review of the operation of the Code, 12
months after the commencement of operation of the Code on
[DD/MM/YYYY]; and
(ii) ensure an external review 21 of the operation of the Code is carried
out every 2 years from the commencement of the operation of the
Code.

10.4 The Administrator shall treat all information it receives in the course of the
dispute resolution process i.e. IDR and EDR, as confidential and not disclose it
to any other person unless required by law to do so.

Question 11
(a) Following a series of engagements with the ITO industry and the
Federation of Automobile Workshop Owners' Association of Malaysia
(FAWOAM), there is general consensus from ITOs and FAWOAM
members for PIAM and MTA to serve as the Administrator of the Code
for their respective sectors.
BNM fully supports the proposal above given the operational and
technical nature of this Code and the disputes that will be handled via
the IDRF arrangements. Notwithstanding this, BNM will ensure ITOs
compliance to the Code’s requirements. Any subsequent enhancements
or reviews to the Code will be subject to BNM’s review and approval.
Do you have any objections to this? Please provide clear justifications
for your view.

20 Refers to an independent person or committee appointed to preside over a dispute via an arbitration
in accordance with the Arbitration Act 2005.
21 This shall be carried out by an independent party not associated with the Administrator of the Code.
This scope of this review should include the effectiveness of dispute resolution processes under the
Code, the awareness and accessibility of the Code, ITOs’ and Repairers’ compliance with the Code
and the effectiveness and adequacy of governance of the Code and Administrator.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

 Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 20 of 28

(b) In relation to sub-paragraph 10.3(f)(ii), please provide your views on

whether the proposed minimum period of 2 years is reasonable. If not,
please provide suggestions supported with clear justifications.

11 Independent Dispute Resolution Framework (IDRF) 22

11.1 IDRF Process
(a) The objective of the IDRF 23 is to serve as an effective dispute resolution
process to address disputes between ITOs and Repairers in a fair,
transparent and timely manner. This is intended to reduce protracted
delays in the motor vehicle claims process that result in poor consumer
outcomes.
(b) The Parties shall resolve disputes raised by Repairers against ITOs
arising from alleged lapses or breaches of this Code –
(i) in accordance with the IDR dispute resolution process set out in
paragraph 11.2; and
(ii) in the event that the Parties fail to resolve the dispute at IDR,
Repairers may escalate the dispute to the independent EDR process
in accordance with paragraph 11.3.
Failure to resolve disputes in accordance with the process stipulated in
this Code amounts to a non-compliance with the Code.
(c) To ensure the objective of IDRF is met, ITOs shall ensure the SLA with its
panel of repairers must, at minimum, include an obligation for the repairer
to abide by the Code.

11.2 Scope of ITO’s Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) Process 24

(a) The IDR process applies to all disputes raised by Repairers on ITOs
relating to alleged lapses or breaches with the Code except for the
following 25:
(i) complaints relating to coverage, liability, insurable interest and
breach of conditions under the motor insurance policy/motor takaful
certificate;
(ii) complaints relating to or with an element of fraud;
(iii) cases under investigation involving authorities e.g. criminal cases or
illegal activities;

22 In order for Repairers to leverage on the IDRF process specified in this Code, the Repairer must be a
participant to the Code which means that the Repairer has agreed to adhere to all requirements of
the Code i.e. at the point of becoming a participant.
23 For the avoidance of doubt, the IDRF consist of ITO’s IDR process and ITOs-Repairers Independent

EDR process.
24 Where no SLA is signed between the ITO and the non-Panel Repairer, the ITO shall ensure that the

IDR process under paragraph 11.2 is agreed upon, and the agreement shall be documented, before
the commencement of the IDR process.
25 For the avoidance of doubt, all disputes relating to non-compliance of the Code shall go through the

IDR as a first step. This includes disputes relating to ITO’s in-house assessor's assessments.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 21 of 28

(iv) where a lawyer or a legal firm has been appointed to act on the
matter;
(v) disputes time barred under the Limitation Act 1953 or Limitation
Ordinance (Sabah) (Cap.72) or Limitation Ordinance (Sarawak)
(Cap. 49);
(vi) matters filed or referred to OFS, Court and any arbitration process
outside of the Code;
(vii) repudiated cases such as cases where the policyowner/takaful
participant is making an appeal on the cost of repair and not the
Repairer; and
(viii) matters set out in paragraph 1.4.

Question 12
Do you have any views on the proposed areas that will be excluded from ITOs’
IDR process? Please provide relevant data, illustrations and justifications to
support your views.

(b) All ITOs shall establish an IDR process that provides for fair, transparent
and timely resolution of complaints submitted by Repairers.

(c) All ITOs shall ensure staff involved in the IDR process –
(i) are not or have not been involved in the assessment or handling of
the claims relating to the complaint; and
(ii) possess adequate qualification and experience in motor vehicle
claims assessment matters. For example, staff who has sound
knowledge on current industry practices, possess the relevant
technical expertise and who can demonstrate reasonable skill, care
and diligence in reviewing the complaint.

(d) All ITOs shall ensure the IDR process is independent and impartial, as far
as practicable. This shall include ensuring an independent senior staff or
a committee 26 is involved in the deliberation and decision-making process
under the IDR process.

(e) In relation to paragraph 11.2(d), ITOs may consider designating an

existing structure such as a Panel Workshop Management Committee or
Vendor Management Department to carry out the responsibilities under
paragraphs 11.2 (c) and (d).

(f) The Repairer shall lodge and track the notification of complaint with the
ITO through the Merimen system.

26 With respect to paragraphs 11.2 (c) and (d), where ITOs have established a committee, the committee
shall comprise a mix of representatives such as Senior Officers of ITOs, representatives from
registered adjusters and representatives from its Panel Repairers.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 22 of 28

(g) With respect to paragraph 11.2(f), the notification of complaint shall, at

minimum, contain the information as stated in Appendix 1.

(h) The ITO shall acknowledge the complaint in writing within 1 working day
from the date of receipt of complaint notification. Repairers and ITOs will
conclude the IDR process no later than 10 working days from the date of
complaint notification lodged with the ITO in accordance with paragraph
11.2(f).

(i) If the Repairer disagrees with the outcome of an ITO’s IDR process, the
Repairer may escalate the complaint to the independent EDR process
except for:
(i) complaints relating to paragraph 6 which includes termination of
panel Repairers; and
(ii) sub-paragraphs 11.3(a)(i-v) which includes complaints excluded
from the independent EDR process.

11.3 ITOs-Repairers Independent External Dispute Resolution (EDR) Process

(a) The EDR process applies to all disputes relating to alleged non-
compliance with the Code except for the following:
(i) disputes arising from sub-paragraphs 6.1, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4 which
includes termination of panel Repairers;
(ii) disputes excluded from the IDR process i.e. sub-paragraphs
11.2(a)(i-viii);
(iii) general business disputes relating to general commercial contracts;
(iv) disputes where no offer has been made to the Repairer due to
insufficient documentation; and
(v) where the disputed amount is below RM10,000;

Question 13
Do you have any views on the proposed areas that will be excluded from
the independent EDR process under paragraph 11.3(a)? Please provide
relevant data, illustrations, and justifications to support your views.

(b) The Parties are encouraged to resolve their disputes using the IDR
process as a first step before pursuing the independent EDR process.
Please refer to Appendix 2 for the flowchart on the overall IDRF.

(c) Under the independent EDR process, both Parties agree to be subject to
the following conditions:
(i) participation in the independent EDR process is mandatory for both
Parties, in the event an EDR process is invoked;
(ii) the Parties agree that the dispute escalated through the independent
EDR process shall be settled via Arbitration by a recognised and
properly qualified Arbitration service provider;
(iii) the Parties will share the costs of Arbitration equally;
(iv) the venue of the Arbitration shall take place online;

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 23 of 28

(v) the Parties shall pay for their own costs of attending the Arbitration,
if any 27;
(vi) throughout the EDR process, the Parties shall agree not to have
legal representation, such as engaging the services of a lawyer or a
legal firm, in relation to the dispute raised through the independent
EDR process;
(vii) the Parties agree that the decision made by the Arbitrator shall be
final and legally binding, i.e. the Parties shall be bound by the
decision made by the Arbitrator; and
(viii) if a party has filed the dispute in court 28 or commenced any dispute
resolution process not stipulated in this Code 29, the party cannot
revert to the Code’s dispute resolution processes.

Question 14
Do you disagree with any conditions stipulated under paragraph 11.3(c)
which both ITOs and Repairers shall abide to in escalating disputes
through the EDR process? Please provide justifications and suggestions,
if any.

(d) To commence an Arbitration process, the Applicant shall serve a

notification of dispute to the Administrator and the Respondent.

(e) The notification of dispute shall, at minimum, contain the following

information as stated under Appendix 3:
(i) the names and contact details of the ITO and the Repairer;
(ii) specific and detailed information about the nature of the dispute;
(iii) supporting documentation about the dispute; and
(iv) in the event the Repairer disagrees with the IDR, an explanation as
to Repairer’s disagreement.

(f) The Administrator shall acknowledge the dispute notification in writing

within 1 working day from date of dispute notification.

(g) The Administrator shall immediately notify the Parties of the date of
commencement of the arbitration 30 and other relevant information, as
required.

27 Arbitration shall be conducted via online channels as per sub-paragraph (c)(iv) and will not incur
additional expenses to attend. However, in the event, the repairer is unable to attend through an
online medium and requires physical attendance, then Parties shall pay their own travel and relevant
expenses such as accommodation and share the costs of booking a meeting venue, if any.
28 This includes if the dispute has been decided by the court or has been through a court appointed
mediation.
29 This includes commencing a dispute through an arbitration process which is not governed and
stipulated by this Code.
30 The refers to the date of dispute notification delivered to the Respondent.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 24 of 28

(h) The Administrator shall ensure an Approved Arbitrator is appointed from

the panel developed by the Administrator under paragraph 10.3(e) within
1 working day from the date of acknowledgement on dispute notification.

Question 15
In view of the general consensus reached between ITOs and FAWOAM
members for PIAM and MTA to serve as the Administrator of the Code
(under paragraph 10), PIAM and MTA are also expected to carry out the
role of the Administrator of the independent EDR process under
paragraph 11.3(f), (g) and (h). The role as an Administrator of the EDR
process is confined to administrative matters only, such as
acknowledging the dispute notification in writing, notifying Parties
involved in the dispute, and to ensure an Approved Arbitrator is
appointed on a timely basis.
In relation to this, as the regulatory authority who will be issuing the Code
under FSA/IFSA, the Bank will be responsible for enforcing the Code,
but will not be carrying out the administrative role of operationalising and
implementing the Code.
In view of PIAM and MTA's role as the industry association that
represents ITOs, what are your views on PIAM and MTA carrying out the
role of the Administrator of the Code and the EDR process? Please
provide clear justifications to support your views.

(i) The Parties shall submit relevant and sufficient documents to the
appointed arbitrator within 3 working days from the date of appointment of
the Approved Arbitrator.

(j) The Parties involved in the Arbitration will ensure confidentiality on all
information relating to or in connection with the Arbitration, including the
terms of any settlement, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties in writing,
except where disclosure is required by law.

(k) The appointed arbitrator shall make a final and binding decision no later
than 10 working days from full receipt of documents submitted by the
Parties to the appointed arbitrator.

Question 16
Do you disagree with any of the timelines stipulated under the IDR (see
paragraph 11.2(h)) and independent EDR process? If you disagree,
please suggest other reasonable timelines supported with relevant data,
illustrations, or justifications.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 25 of 28

(l) In the event any Party fails to comply with the binding decision 31 of the
appointed arbitrator:
(i) appropriate actions will be taken against ITOs by the relevant
authorities;
(ii) may lead to removal of the Repairer from ITO’s panelship; and
(iii) non-panel Repairers will no longer be able to refer any disputes they
may have with ITOs to the independent EDR process.

Question 17
Paragraph 11.3(l) stipulates the implications of non-compliance by the
Parties involved i.e. ITOs or Repairers, to the binding decision of the
Appointed Arbitrator. This is to ensure that there is finality to the
appointed arbitrator’s decision and to avoid prolonged delays in disputes
between ITOs and Repairers which negatively affects consumer’s
interest.
What are your views of the implications of non-compliance with binding
decision of the appointed arbitrator under paragraph 11.3(l)? If you
disagree, please suggest what the implications should be in the event of
non-compliance of the binding decision of the appointed arbitrator.

ITOs and repairers may seek enforcement of the arbitrator's decision through a court proceeding
31

which will incur legal costs. As such, this approach should be the last resort taken by the Parties.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 26 of 28

Appendix 1

NOTIFICATION OF COMPLAINT

A. Details of Complaint

1. Date of reporting to insurer/takaful operator (ITO)

2. The names and contact details of the ITO and the Repairer

3. Nature of the complaint

4. Date of incident

5. Time of incident

6. Place of incident

7. Other information 32

B. Affairs or Account of Policyowner/Takaful Participant Involved

1. Name of policyowner/ takaful participant involved

2. Types / details of policy/takaful certificate involved (Please provide the copy of
relevant document)

3. Details of claim

32Any other information that Repairers are of view is relevant for ITOs to obtain to better assess and
resolve the complaint.

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 27 of 28

Appendix 2

Issued on: 21 December 2023

Public Consultation on Insurers/Takaful Operators-Repairers Code of Conduct 28 of 28

Appendix 3

NOTIFICATION OF DISPUTE

A. Details of Dispute

1. Date of reporting to insurer/takaful operator (ITO)

2. The names and contact details of the ITO and the Repairer
Nature of the dispute (Please provide the copy of relevant supporting
3.
documents including those provided under Appendix 1)
Explanation on Repairer’s disagreement on the outcome of the internal dispute
4.
resolution (IDR), where relevant
5. Date of incident

6. Time of incident

7. Place of incident

8. Other information 33

1. Name of policyowner/takaful participant involved

2. Types / details of policy/takaful certificate involved (Please provide the copy of
relevant document)

3. Details of claim

33Any other information that Repairers are of view that is relevant for ITOs to obtain to better assess
and resolve the complaint.

Issued on: 21 December 2023