My friend from Paris gave me an update of the city's proposed car sharing scheme. It will involve 3,000 electric-operated vehicles. The city is inviting proposals from private sector operators to run the car sharing scheme, which is expected to operate from 2012.
This is an interesting approach. The city government is able to find the parking spaces and clears the regulatory hurdles. The private sector will operate the schemes under some regulated pricing.
The advantage of the proposed car sharing scheme are:
- use of electric vehicles, which is friendly for the environment
- each vehicle can be shared by many users in a day (save parking space) and reduced number of vehicles
I hope that a similar scheme can be set up in each of the towns in Singapore to provide local transport from residential areas to MRT stations and bus terminus.
Tan Kin Lian
Thursday, June 24, 2010
Late submission of critical illness claim
Dear Mr. Tan,
My wife was diagnosed with breast cancer stage three in 2007. At that time, we did not realised she had a ILP with X and critical illness cover was attached to the plan. We shifted house in the process and only realised the policy existence when we went back to collect our mails. The fact is the policy is still in force because the cash value is being taken to finance the policy, including of its critical illness cover.
Now X is asking us to furnish a memo explaining why we made the claims so late. I'm concerned whether X will make good the claim because its a genuine oversight on our part.
Can you advise me on how we should revert to X and honestly in your opinion, do you think the chances of us getting the claim is good?
REPLY
You can state your facts honestly, that you were not aware about the insurance policy previously. You made the claim as soon as you realised that there was a cover. I think that X should accept your claim. If they reject it, you can consult a lawyer.
My wife was diagnosed with breast cancer stage three in 2007. At that time, we did not realised she had a ILP with X and critical illness cover was attached to the plan. We shifted house in the process and only realised the policy existence when we went back to collect our mails. The fact is the policy is still in force because the cash value is being taken to finance the policy, including of its critical illness cover.
Now X is asking us to furnish a memo explaining why we made the claims so late. I'm concerned whether X will make good the claim because its a genuine oversight on our part.
Can you advise me on how we should revert to X and honestly in your opinion, do you think the chances of us getting the claim is good?
REPLY
You can state your facts honestly, that you were not aware about the insurance policy previously. You made the claim as soon as you realised that there was a cover. I think that X should accept your claim. If they reject it, you can consult a lawyer.
Cash back policy
Comment posted in my blog (edited)
The whole idea of cash back is to confuse the consumers. Imagine the executive financial consultants cannot calculate and know little about this product, how do you expect the consumers to understand.
One social enterprise launched another product recently. These consumers will be in for a good ride when they find out that the projected return will not be delivered after 10 years. These consumers deserve it for trusting their agents. Don't know whether to pity the consumers or not.Consumers may think the cashbacks are interest earned. They are actually your own money returned to you as cash back. The agents are silent on this. The agents were trained not to mention anything until you ask. They tell the customers the points that 'sound' good and suppress the risk to the consumer.
My comment
The insurance agent compares the yield of these cash back product (around 1% per annum) with the low rate of interest on bank deposits. This comparison is wrong. Consumers should not lock their savings for 10 years or longer at the low yield. A fairer comparision is the yield on government bonds of the same duration, which should be more than 2% per annum. Furthermore, the government bonds are liquid and can be sold at a fair market price, without the heavy penalty that is found in a life insurance policy.
Learn about the "effect of deduction" from Practical Guide on Financial Planning.
The whole idea of cash back is to confuse the consumers. Imagine the executive financial consultants cannot calculate and know little about this product, how do you expect the consumers to understand.
One social enterprise launched another product recently. These consumers will be in for a good ride when they find out that the projected return will not be delivered after 10 years. These consumers deserve it for trusting their agents. Don't know whether to pity the consumers or not.Consumers may think the cashbacks are interest earned. They are actually your own money returned to you as cash back. The agents are silent on this. The agents were trained not to mention anything until you ask. They tell the customers the points that 'sound' good and suppress the risk to the consumer.
My comment
The insurance agent compares the yield of these cash back product (around 1% per annum) with the low rate of interest on bank deposits. This comparison is wrong. Consumers should not lock their savings for 10 years or longer at the low yield. A fairer comparision is the yield on government bonds of the same duration, which should be more than 2% per annum. Furthermore, the government bonds are liquid and can be sold at a fair market price, without the heavy penalty that is found in a life insurance policy.
Learn about the "effect of deduction" from Practical Guide on Financial Planning.
The Awakening
Read this inspiring article.
Some key points:
- stop judging and pointing fingers
- honesty and integrity are the foundations to build a life
- stop trying to control situations, people an doutcome
Some key points:
- stop judging and pointing fingers
- honesty and integrity are the foundations to build a life
- stop trying to control situations, people an doutcome
Shield claim
Dear Mr Tan,
A few months back my father went to hospital to do a post-hostpitalisation treatment of immunotherapy for bladder cancer. He is insured under Enhanced IncomeShield Policy and NTUC said that as the date of treatment exceeds 90 days from the date of hospitalisation (it was 93 days) they are not liable to pay.In fact, we got the doctor to write a letter of appeal but it was rejected. Would you know how we can appeal for this?
REPLY
Please ask the insurance company to give you a written reply for their rejection, i.e. to quote the clause from the policy about the coverage and their reason for rejection.
I believe that the policy does cover outpatient treatment for cancer. Can you see if your father's condition fits into this outpatient treatment? It is not related to the 90 day period from post-hospitalisation. I am not familiar with the exact coverage, so my remarks needs to be checked against clarification from the insurance company.
A few months back my father went to hospital to do a post-hostpitalisation treatment of immunotherapy for bladder cancer. He is insured under Enhanced IncomeShield Policy and NTUC said that as the date of treatment exceeds 90 days from the date of hospitalisation (it was 93 days) they are not liable to pay.In fact, we got the doctor to write a letter of appeal but it was rejected. Would you know how we can appeal for this?
REPLY
Please ask the insurance company to give you a written reply for their rejection, i.e. to quote the clause from the policy about the coverage and their reason for rejection.
I believe that the policy does cover outpatient treatment for cancer. Can you see if your father's condition fits into this outpatient treatment? It is not related to the 90 day period from post-hospitalisation. I am not familiar with the exact coverage, so my remarks needs to be checked against clarification from the insurance company.
2 million visitors
Congratulations to the following winners for being the 2,000,000th visitor to http://www.tankinlian.blogspot.com/
Clarence Goh
Vincent Choy
Chua Wei Lin
Eddy Lim
Aik Theng Chong
Kelvin Chin
Teo Aik Kiat
Please get your friends to visit my blog, http://www.tankinlian.blogspot.com/
Clarence Goh
Vincent Choy
Chua Wei Lin
Eddy Lim
Aik Theng Chong
Kelvin Chin
Teo Aik Kiat
Please get your friends to visit my blog, http://www.tankinlian.blogspot.com/
Open market create jobs
I saw an ad on CNN from the International Chamber of Commerce. It said, "Open Markets Create Jobs". I reflected on this message. It is a strong, appealling message, but is it true?
It is certainly true in some respects. The jobs are created in developing countries. But it came at a big price for these countries.
Look at what is happening in China. Many workers found that the wages could not keep up with the cost of living. They are taking industrial action and go on strike. This would be unthinkable in a communist country where the trade unions are under the control of the Government. But, it is happening, and the Government seemed to find it difficult to maintain the industrial harmony.
The jobs that went to the developing countries were at the expense of the same jobs that were lost in their home countries. Looking at the global picture, the number of jobs may not have increased. Instead the wage cost has come down, and that allows more profit for the capital owners.
These jobs were also made at the expense of public sector jobs that could improve the quality of life for the people, i.e. teachers, health care, community services, etc. With globalisation, more people are now working in jobs that product material goods, at the expense of public service jobs that help to make a balanced, better life for the people.
We need a new way of looking at jobs in its totality. If the trend continues as it had for the past two decades, we will have a less stable a less happy environment.
Tan Kin Lian
It is certainly true in some respects. The jobs are created in developing countries. But it came at a big price for these countries.
Look at what is happening in China. Many workers found that the wages could not keep up with the cost of living. They are taking industrial action and go on strike. This would be unthinkable in a communist country where the trade unions are under the control of the Government. But, it is happening, and the Government seemed to find it difficult to maintain the industrial harmony.
The jobs that went to the developing countries were at the expense of the same jobs that were lost in their home countries. Looking at the global picture, the number of jobs may not have increased. Instead the wage cost has come down, and that allows more profit for the capital owners.
These jobs were also made at the expense of public sector jobs that could improve the quality of life for the people, i.e. teachers, health care, community services, etc. With globalisation, more people are now working in jobs that product material goods, at the expense of public service jobs that help to make a balanced, better life for the people.
We need a new way of looking at jobs in its totality. If the trend continues as it had for the past two decades, we will have a less stable a less happy environment.
Tan Kin Lian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)