[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ AN INDEPENDENT VIEW ‘ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=’30’ subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY NEIL HONEYMAN
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
Tuesday, October 3, 2017
[/av_textblock]
[av_textblock size=’18’ font_color=” color=”]
I SHOULD mention that I wish no harm to the various financial institutions which I have mentioned in these articles. The vast majority of representatives of these organizations, in my direct experience, operate with undoubted probity. It is not my desire to hurt these individuals, nor the financial institutions they represent. Nevertheless, not all is well with the standing of some aspects of the financial services industry, particularly the insurance sector.
In my experience, insurance companies do not take disagreements with clients seriously enough. Financial institutions which operate with probity are very concerned when there is any disagreement with a client. Rigorous investigations are promptly carried out. Associated with probity is the absolute knowledge of what has happened. Indisputable audit trails exist.
A few years ago, we had the example of the Legacy Group, an insurance company which allegedly took clients’ money, did not issue a receipt but never issued the policy documents.
We had a similar experience with PhilamLife.
No wonder the market size of the insurance sector is smaller than what the experts think it should be.
Our experience is that the company that mistreated us insists on maintaining an inappropriate ascendancy. We fulfilled our obligations. PhilamLife did not, so we never received the policy documents that we paid for.
Years later we found that its staff had falsified a “quit claim” form, using signatures obtained from our BDO (PhilamLife’s BankAssurance partner at the time) signature cards. “A serious allegation” intones PhilamLife.
Yes, but PhilamLife does not deny it, because it is true.
I reported the matter to the Insurance Commission which instructed PhilamLife to reply to me “within ten days”. PhilamLife did not comply. What is the point of having a taxpayer-funded Commission which does not force an errant insurance company to face up to the misconduct of its representatives? In fact, PhilamLife tells me that the Commission did not find any misconduct. This silly sophistry should encourage the Commission to carry out a rigorous audit of the failed transaction instead of merely acting as an intermediary between an insurance company and its wronged client.
In June 2017, AIA (PhilamLife’s parent company) CEO Mr. Ng came to the Philippines in the hope of finding out how PhilamLife can regain its lost market share. I can help him. PhilamLife needs to recognize its past improbity together with understanding the need to avoid unnecessary disputes with clients who fulfilled their obligations.
The problem arises from its management which inadequately supervises errant low-level representatives and has insufficient respect for its clients.
A substantial change in corporate culture is required./PN
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
