* CHRONICLE - PENSIONERS CONVERGE HERE, DISCUSS ISSUES OF THEIR CHOICE * CHRONICLE - WHERE EVEN THE CHAT COLUMN PRODUCES GREAT DISCUSSIONS * CHRONICLE - WHERE THE MUSIC IS RISING IN CRESCENDO !

               
                                   

Thursday, April 04, 2013



Shri Thiruvenkataswamy Rajagopalan has sent us a feedback that making adjustments in business figures "is done by all institutions all over the world for year end figures. Nothing wrong if it is just a few percentage less. "  Of course claim payment figures cannot be manipulated. 

Shri Thiruvenkataswamy has made such a short remark that we initially could not deduce what he meant.  We believe he is also agreeing with us that the correct figures should be projected. There is nothing wrong if it is a few percentage less.

The mention "all over the world" or "the world over" made us remember an incident happened in the office of Ombudsman when a LIC lady officer made the plea that "insurance companies the world over" did not disclose reasons for refusal of insurance.  Ombudsman rejected this plea and asked LIC to disclose reasons for refusal of insurance and finally Central Office disclosed the reasons. Click on 'Read more' below to read the story published in the blog 'INITIATIVE'.


Tuesday, March 2, 2010

Service Story: "My LIC days!"
by PG.POOCHERY



MY LORD, THAT'S THE PRACTICE!

It was her humble submission that "insurance companies the world over do not disclose reasons for refusal of insurance". It is a fact that they do canvass people for insurance. They grant insurance. When however they refuse to give insurance, they do not disclose their reasons.

But the Ombudsman was not convinced. He asked: "Why?"
Lady officer who represented LIC repeated her answer. "Sir, we don't disclose reasons".
"Why?"
"Sir, the world over, that is the practice!" This time she asserted with all the emphasis at her command.
But the Ombudsman ordered that the reason for refusal of insurance must be disclosed to the person seeking insurance. Finally insurance office relented and the reason was communicated.
Permission for communicating the reasons was conveyed by the Central Office.  But they instructed the Divisional Office to intimate the Ombudsman that as a special case the reason was being intimated.  In future the reasons won't be disclosed.

Again, why? Nobody had the reason. But they knew that it can't be said. But what is the reason? Again the same old answer: it can't be disclosed.

Insurance companies collected many details from the applicant through the application for insurance. In addition they collected information from agents, doctors and others with the understanding that the same shall be kept as confidential. They are duty bound to keep this information as confidential. This is the reason why it is not disclosed.
Ombudsman should have been explained this point and at the same time, LIC should have volunteered  to disclose the reasons only to the ombudsman in a closed cover but not to the applicant.  This is the usual practice in courts while dealing with confidential matters and such an argument would have been accepted by the Ombudsman also.  

With the advent of institutions like Ombudsman and Consumer Forum, the old method of refusing to act or to inform the customers is no more possible. The insurance companies have to learn to invent new styles and exist.