A marketing office in a bank sold a life insurance policy to a customer. He explained that it is a 5 year investment. He explained the product detail in a tablet. The customer signed on the tablet to make the investment of $70,000.
The customer did not realize that the product was actually a life insurance policy which required an annual premium of $70,000 payable for 5 years and the policy will only mature at the end of 10 years.
The customer could not pay the second premium. The policy lapsed. The customer lost the full sum of $70,000. The bank and the insurance company refused to refund the $70,000. They asked the customer to approach FIDREC.
The policyholder came to me for help.
I posted her story in my blog, but removed detail that could identify her.
I advised the policyholder to "fight the case" in FIDREC, to take legal action and also tell the story in the media.
The policyholder waited for mediation by FIDREC. After a month, she told me that the bank had decided to refund the full sum of $70,000 to her and that the marketing officer had been terminated for mis-selling the product.
The bank was probably embarrassed by the strong words in this article:
http://tankinlian.blogspot.sg/2016/05/serious-mis-selling-of-investment.html
This was a fortunate outcome for the policyholder. I asked her to make a voluntary donation to FISCA.
The customer did not realize that the product was actually a life insurance policy which required an annual premium of $70,000 payable for 5 years and the policy will only mature at the end of 10 years.
The customer could not pay the second premium. The policy lapsed. The customer lost the full sum of $70,000. The bank and the insurance company refused to refund the $70,000. They asked the customer to approach FIDREC.
The policyholder came to me for help.
I posted her story in my blog, but removed detail that could identify her.
I advised the policyholder to "fight the case" in FIDREC, to take legal action and also tell the story in the media.
The policyholder waited for mediation by FIDREC. After a month, she told me that the bank had decided to refund the full sum of $70,000 to her and that the marketing officer had been terminated for mis-selling the product.
The bank was probably embarrassed by the strong words in this article:
http://tankinlian.blogspot.sg/2016/05/serious-mis-selling-of-investment.html
This was a fortunate outcome for the policyholder. I asked her to make a voluntary donation to FISCA.
This is not the first or the last case. It is an ongoing . Insurance agents , salesmen, RM or by any title they are conning the public. Where is MAS, the so called regulator, the protector of the public. Is MAS eating shit?
ReplyDeleteKudos to you for championing the consumers' cause. MAS is a gone case; it has sold its soul to
ReplyDeleteinsurers.Consumers must not rely on MAS for protection. It doesn't protect you but the sellers
To pay $70000 annually for commoners is ridiculous. If bank sets criteria for us to take loan, shouldn't they too set criteria for us to take up a high premium insurance?
ReplyDelete