Ethics in the Insurance Business

TruthSeeker

TruthSeeker

Fancy Virtual Reality Monkey
Valued Senior Member
I'm currently taking an intensive course on insurance and investment law. I'm amazed at how the government allows insurance companies and agents to screw people up! Shouldn't some practices in the indutry be prohibited (such as defining "any occupation disability" as only coma, while the insured believes it is a general definition of disability!)?

Also, a lot of companies make the contracts too complicated, don't allow customers to take time to carefully read the contract and don't act on the best interest of the consumers. As a result, consumers end with policies that are worthless. Because people are confused, wouldn't that be considered a lack of "meeting of the minds" and therefore render the contract void? Could that open the possibility for clients to start a class action lawsuit against deceiving insurance corporations?

What do you think?
 
yeah but were is this line when a contract is not complicated an so is easily to read and is "complicated" and so can be sued?
 
The issue is not even whether it is complicated or not. The issue is that there was no meeting of the minds. That is a requirement for the contract to be enforceable and valid.
 
It's called a "mistake" in law. Mistakes can affect the decision of a party to enter into contract, in which case, would make the contract invalid.
 
TruthSeeker said:
Also, a lot of companies make the contracts too complicated, don't allow customers to take time to carefully read the contract and don't act on the best interest of the consumers. As a result, consumers end with policies that are worthless. Because people are confused, wouldn't that be considered a lack of "meeting of the minds" and therefore render the contract void? Could that open the possibility for clients to start a class action lawsuit against deceiving insurance corporations?
Click to expand...

Don't allow customers to take time to carefully read the contract?
How can that be?

Sure, people from various business branches generally are uncomfortable when someone takes their time to carefully read over a contract.
But at the end of the contract, there is a "I have read and understood" clause before the client's signature. By signing, the client states he has "read and understood".

Clients should be more careful before they sign anything, and they should demand time to properly read a contract.
 
Ethics and insurance industry are almost oxymorons. Most insurance companies will do ANYTHING to get out of paying a claim. They eventually collapse under pressure (especially from a lawyer) and pay, but the process is normally unbearable. Some are better than others. I look at the companies that tried to get out of paying on the CA fires and Katrina. They are the worst imo.
 
TruthSeeker said:
I'm currently taking an intensive course on insurance and investment law. I'm amazed at how the government allows insurance companies and agents to screw people up! Shouldn't some practices in the indutry be prohibited (such as defining "any occupation disability" as only coma, while the insured believes it is a general definition of disability!)?

Also, a lot of companies make the contracts too complicated, don't allow customers to take time to carefully read the contract and don't act on the best interest of the consumers. As a result, consumers end with policies that are worthless. Because people are confused, wouldn't that be considered a lack of "meeting of the minds" and therefore render the contract void? Could that open the possibility for clients to start a class action lawsuit against deceiving insurance corporations?

What do you think?
Click to expand...

the only way for a insurance company to make money is to deny care or charge excessivly high amounts of money
 
greenberg said:
Don't allow customers to take time to carefully read the contract?
How can that be?

Sure, people from various business branches generally are uncomfortable when someone takes their time to carefully read over a contract.
But at the end of the contract, there is a "I have read and understood" clause before the client's signature. By signing, the client states he has "read and understood".

Clients should be more careful before they sign anything, and they should demand time to properly read a contract.
Click to expand...
True. But the contract is often in financial AND legal lingo. How would a regular client understand it? Also, what if they ask what something means and get lied to? It's very unlikely the client will understand the implications of the contract.
 
TruthSeeker said:
True. But the contract is often in financial AND legal lingo. How would a regular client understand it? Also, what if they ask what something means and get lied to? It's very unlikely the client will understand the implications of the contract.
Click to expand...

If the client signs it, he thereby obligates himself. Fortunately or unfortunately.

Fact is, living in a society like this, one better work on one's understanding of laws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top