Client Experiences
What clients say about the practice
Accounts from policyholders, insurers, and corporates who engaged Lindung Legal on insurance matters.
Back to Homepage12+
Years of Practice
200+
Matters Handled
4.8
Average Client Rating
3
Practice Areas
From Our Clients
Client testimonials
"The insurer declined our warehouse fire claim citing a condition we were not aware had been breached. Lindung Legal read the policy carefully and identified that the condition in question required written notice at a particular stage — the insurer's reading was too broad. The matter was resolved through correspondence within about two months."
Rajesh Kumar
SME Owner · Butterworth, Penang
March 2025
"We instructed Lindung Legal on a subrogation recovery from a road accident where our insured's vehicle was struck by a lorry. The limitation analysis they provided at the outset was thorough. Monthly reporting kept our claims team updated without requiring us to chase. Recovery was achieved at the demand stage."
Siti Lailatul bt. Azman
Claims Manager · Kuala Lumpur
February 2025
"My medical insurance claim for a specialist procedure was declined on the basis that the condition was pre-existing. Lindung Legal pointed out that the policy definition of pre-existing was narrower than the insurer was applying. The matter went to the Financial Mediation Bureau and was resolved in my favour."
Loh Hui Lin
Individual Policyholder · George Town
January 2025
"We needed a coverage opinion for an unusual property loss scenario before deciding how to respond to the policyholder's demand. The opinion was thorough, clearly structured, and delivered within the timeframe discussed. It was grounded in the actual policy wording rather than general insurance principles — which was exactly what we needed."
Muhammad Firdaus bin Che
Underwriting Director · Penang
March 2025
"Our cargo insurer reduced a claim significantly, citing under-insurance. The matter involved some complexity around the valuation clause. Lindung Legal's advice on the correct interpretation was clear, and the insurer revised their position after correspondence. The whole process took about three months."
Tan Wei Seng
Logistics Company Director · Port Klang
February 2025
"As a takaful operator, we needed regulatory advice on an intermediary distribution arrangement that had some ambiguity under the conduct rules. The firm's knowledge of IFSA 2013 and BNM's expectations was evident. The fee letter was clear before we started, and the cap was honoured."
Nurul Izzah bt. Harun
Compliance Officer · Kuala Lumpur
April 2025
Case Studies
Matter summaries
The following summaries describe the type of matter handled. All identifying details are generalised.
Policyholder Dispute — Property Insurance
Challenge
An SME's fire insurance claim for damage to commercial premises was declined on the basis of an alleged misrepresentation at the time of policy renewal. The insurer cited a condition requiring notification of material changes.
Approach
Full policy wording review confirmed the notification condition was prospective, not retroactive. A written demand letter to the insurer set out the analysis, with reference to the relevant clause. The insurer's position was shown to rest on a misreading of the condition.
Result
The insurer agreed to reassess the claim after receipt of the demand letter. A settlement representing a substantial portion of the claimed loss was reached within approximately nine weeks of instruction. The matter did not require FMB referral or court proceedings.
Subrogation Recovery — Road Accident
Challenge
An insurer had paid a motor claim for a vehicle written off in a collision caused by a commercial lorry. The lorry operator disputed liability, and the limitation period for recovery proceedings was approaching.
Approach
Evidence collected by the insurer's adjuster was reviewed immediately on instruction. A demand letter to the lorry operator's insurer was issued within two weeks. When the response was unsatisfactory, a writ was filed promptly to preserve the limitation position.
Result
The lorry operator's insurer settled the claim in full approximately four months after instruction, before the matter proceeded to trial. Recovery included the principal sum and a contribution to costs. Monthly reporting throughout kept the insurer's finance team informed at each stage.
Coverage Opinion — Liability Policy
Challenge
A liability insurer needed a coverage opinion on whether a third-party claim fell within a professional liability policy following a service dispute. The claim involved an arguable exclusion and the policy's aggregation clause.
Approach
A written coverage opinion addressed both the exclusion and the aggregation question separately, with analysis of the factual matrix against the policy wording. The opinion flagged two available interpretations and assessed which was more likely to be preferred by a Malaysian court given existing authority.
Result
The insurer used the opinion to inform its reserving decision and its response to the third-party claimant. The engagement was completed within an agreed hourly cap. A follow-up supplemental note was provided when the facts developed, within the original fee arrangement.
Ready to discuss your matter?
Send a short description and receive a written initial view within the same or next working day.
Contact Us