Hi Everyone,
My very first topic...here goes.......
A few years ago a person I know developed arthritis in one knee. After many months off work through sikness as a result he/she (to maintain forum anonimity) was dismissed on the grounds that the arthritis made it impossible to continue in his/hers present role.
All releveant claims were made includeing one under the Permanent Disability section of the critical illness policy. The claim was rejected. After months of letters he/she finally gave up to consider the next move.
During this time he/she developed arthritis in the other knee (he/she now walks with the aid of a stick) and then developed Fibromylagia. Another claim was made and this too was rejected on the grounds that he/she could still do the occupation they had registered albeit from a wheelchair if necessary. He/She's occupation did involve some physical labour and mobile duties but generally it was administrative, say 70:30 ratio.
He she was dismissed by the employer for not being able to do the 30% physical part which the insurance company said was unimportant as far as the occupation was concerned because he/she was still able to do the other 70% administrative part in some form for another employer even if it meant doing a different job altogether as long as the admin work could still be done.
This was not he/she thought when the policy was set up as OWN OCCUPATION and not ANY OCCUPATION which seems to be how it is being treated. The insurer appears to have seized on the administrative side of the occupation and said this can make up 100% of any new occupation. That would be okay if the policy said ANY OCCUPATION. Had he/she known this at the time they may have opted for the any occupation policy and saved themselves a considerable amount in additional premium charges. Perhaps there is a case against the financial advisor who sold the policy as well as the insurer.
Anyway the questions that arise are:-
1) With the limited brief above who do you think is right?
2) How might the FOS decide? He/she does not qualify for any legal aid or other assistance.
3) Can a complaint be made against the Financial Advisor for selling an inappropriate policy.
Thanks in advance.
My very first topic...here goes.......
A few years ago a person I know developed arthritis in one knee. After many months off work through sikness as a result he/she (to maintain forum anonimity) was dismissed on the grounds that the arthritis made it impossible to continue in his/hers present role.
All releveant claims were made includeing one under the Permanent Disability section of the critical illness policy. The claim was rejected. After months of letters he/she finally gave up to consider the next move.
During this time he/she developed arthritis in the other knee (he/she now walks with the aid of a stick) and then developed Fibromylagia. Another claim was made and this too was rejected on the grounds that he/she could still do the occupation they had registered albeit from a wheelchair if necessary. He/She's occupation did involve some physical labour and mobile duties but generally it was administrative, say 70:30 ratio.
He she was dismissed by the employer for not being able to do the 30% physical part which the insurance company said was unimportant as far as the occupation was concerned because he/she was still able to do the other 70% administrative part in some form for another employer even if it meant doing a different job altogether as long as the admin work could still be done.
This was not he/she thought when the policy was set up as OWN OCCUPATION and not ANY OCCUPATION which seems to be how it is being treated. The insurer appears to have seized on the administrative side of the occupation and said this can make up 100% of any new occupation. That would be okay if the policy said ANY OCCUPATION. Had he/she known this at the time they may have opted for the any occupation policy and saved themselves a considerable amount in additional premium charges. Perhaps there is a case against the financial advisor who sold the policy as well as the insurer.
Anyway the questions that arise are:-
1) With the limited brief above who do you think is right?
2) How might the FOS decide? He/she does not qualify for any legal aid or other assistance.
3) Can a complaint be made against the Financial Advisor for selling an inappropriate policy.
Thanks in advance.
Comment