Insurance Companies Improve Protection Insurance
August 29th, 2009 | 
Author:
Most trained advisors would concurthat Protection Insurance is vital to most families, whether it may be a precaution in the event of prolonged illness, premature death, cover for an accident or loss of employment (especially in the present economic climate),.
Life Insurance is the foundation of all financial assurance to ensure a lump sum that is not taxable, in the event of a death or for cover for a mortgage. Unfortunately, a percentage of other Protection Insurance policies, do not do not have equivalentdo not have similar} reliable qualities and have been labelled as being miss-sold. furthermore, based on what we know, critical illness cover has suffered because of startling omissions from policies making it possible for insurance companies to reject a claim even if it is genuine.
In spite of this, a little faith was re established when Aviva gave details on the conclusion of claims on Critical Illness Insurance policies on their half yearly statistics.
Critical Illness claims were being rejected because clients did not make known their complete medical record. As a result Standard Life reports that in the last seven months the amount of turned down claims has fallen considerably from 6.7% in the previous year, to 2.3%.
Why? We think, not simply Aviva but all insurers, because of harmful publicity, have been put into a situation whereby they must diminish the amount of claims that are rejected. Does this prove how strong the media can be? Debateable perhaps - you may think we are sceptical but we think there are other factors that urged the insurance companies to make adjustments. Lately, as a consequence of |bad press|dire media}, sales of Critical Illness Insurance policies have declined which in turn has obviously affected the insurance company’s profit. This is most likely to have been the vehicle to further change!
Friends Provident, Norwich Union, Scottish Provident and Axa have instigated some major alterations specially created to diminish their rejection rates. Firstly, they outline clearly that all health disclosure, however minor a visit to a Doctor might have been, must be includedmade known. Axa, together with others will get a medically trained person to telephone every applicant to go through all the details of their medical history. If the insurance policy then goes on risk, some policyholders are being reminded that it is essential that they provide full medical disclosure and they are allowed to add or put right any information on their application.
The insurer may then reconsider the risk and if it is believed to be increased the monthly premium will probably be raised – which appears more sensible and eventually more appropriate than paying the original payment then having a claim rejected as a result of non-disclosure of medical records.
These measures should have been applied by the insurers a long time ago as the public’s perception of Protection Insurance has deteriorated by their somewhat strange approach. On a positive note, there is an obvious and essential need for protection insurance so we can hope that it is able to reinstate faith and then the esteem it rightly deserves.
Posted in General Stuff