Dirty Tricks in Bank Income Protection Insurance
I have just heard a horror story about a bank/insurer and their Income Protection insurance. Customer has a policy that pays a benefit if he is temporarily totally unable to work. He had an accident and was off work. The bank/insurer started paying the claim.\
Unfortunately, while disabled, he fell and damaged another limb (shoulder) and was told by the doctor that he shouldn't work as a result of this accident.
Bank/insurer stops paying him after the first injury is recovered and refuses to pay for the second claim, even though he can't work. They claim that he was not covered for the second injury because he wasn't working when the injury occurred.
Nonsense! There is nothing in the policy wording - I have checked it carefully - that would allow the bank/insurer to decline the second claim! I think that it is just an over-zealous clerk reading more into the words of the policy than are there.
My advice: Get a Letter of Deadlock from the bank/insurer and refer the matter to the Insurance and Savings Ombudsman
would be interesting to hear a follow up on this one!
ReplyDeleteSo far seems the organisation in question isn't even following their own complaints process and are refusing to give a letter of Deadlock.
ReplyDeleteUpdate on this one - the company in question, after realising the claimant wasn't giving up, decided to do a 'review' - took another 6 weeks of 'internal process' - and today claim accepted and money in the bank!
ReplyDelete