Letter received from Shri R K Pathak , our google group member , on the above subject is reproduced below.
Quote
Health Insurance – For protection of Health but of WHOM????
As per the 10th bipartite settlement
signed on 25/05/2015, IBA introduced Group Health Insurance Scheme for
Employees in Service as well as for retirees with cover of 3 lacs for award
staff and 4 lacs for Officers.
The Insurance premium charged for cover of 3 & 4
lacs for retirees was of Rs.4930 and 6573 excluding service tax and policy became
in operation from 1/11/2015 to 31/10/2016.
The almost 11 month’s period is lapsed and still IBA
is yet to decide the issue of “Domiciliary Treatment” which was agreed in
settlement and now policy is due for renewal.
The Group Health Insurance Policy of in service
Employees is due for renewal on 1/10/2016 and UIIC was expected to renew the
policy without increasing the premium. But now UIIC has intimated the IBA vide
their communication dated 15/09/2016 that revised premium from 01/10/2016 will
be as under:-
Category
|
Amount
Insured
|
Previous
Premium
|
Revised
premium
|
Increase in
Amount
|
Increase in
%
|
Award Staff
|
Rs.3.00
lacs
|
Rs.4930+
Tax
|
10452 + Tax
|
5522
|
112
|
Officers
|
Rs.4.00
Lacs
|
Rs.6573 +
Tax
|
Rs.13935 +
Tax
|
7363
|
112
|
The UIIC has increased the premium by 112% which
is not in accordance with the policy document and condition stipulated at clause
5.18 which reads as under:-
5.18 LOW/HIGH
CLAIM RATIO (BONUS /MALUS)
Subject otherwise to terms and conditions of Group Mediclaim Policy as
attached. The Insurance Company agrees for a continuity cover for three years
based on the following annual renewal matrix. Claims Ratio
Claims Ratio
|
Discount/ Loading Percentage
to be applied on the base premium
|
Not Exceeding 25% | 40% discount |
Not Exceeding 30% | 35% discount |
Not Exceeding 40% | 25% discount |
Not Exceeding 50% | 15% discount |
Not Exceeding 60% | 5% discount |
61% - 110% | No discount no Loading |
111% - 115% | 5% loading |
116% - 120% | 7% loading |
121% - 125% | 10% loading |
126% - 130% | 13% loading |
131% - 135% | 15% loading |
136% - 140% | 18% loading |
IBA immediately responded UIIC over revised premium
referring the agreed clause 5.18 in the policy, vide their communication dated
17/09/2016 but UIIC did not concede to the request of the IBA as
claim ratio has reached 180 to 190% for which loading matrix was not provided
in the Policy and became firm on 112% increase in the premium.
As the policy is due for renewal on 1/10/2016 for in-service
employees and as IBA has advised to Bank of revised premium on 22/09/2016 [copy
attached] and as the insurance premium has to be paid in advance, Member Banks
will have to accept this unreasonable rise in the premium and will be making
payments to UIIC contrary to the terms of Policy.
Neither Bank Management NOR UFBU leaders will raise
any voice on the dictating terms of UIIC & IBA as in service employees
premium is borne by Bank and Board of the Bank is not accountable to GOI for
accepting this unreasonable term by debit to Banks profit, which is already
shrinking.
The real problem is ahead as the policy for retirees
is due for renewal on 1/11/2016 and premium has to be paid by retirees, POOR
retirees will have to accept this unreasonable premium which is not only exorbitant
but equal to / double of their monthly pension / family pension and acts of
UIIC / IBA and Bank raises doubt that whether the policy is implemented to protect
the life of Retirees or to destroy them with a view to remove them from members
of Pension fund????.
Attention is invited of ALL CONCERNED to
terms and condition of policy document which is as under:-
8. IMPORTANT NOTICE
“The Company may revise any of the terms, conditions and exceptions of
this insurance including the premium payable on renewal in accordance with the
guidelines/rules framed by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority
(IRDA) and after obtaining prior approval from the Authority. We shall notify you of such
changes at least three months before the revision are to take effect.
The Company may also withdraw the insurance as offered hereunder after
following the due process as laid down by the IRDA and after obtaining prior
approval of the Authority and we shall offer to cover you under such
revised/new terms, conditions, exceptions and premium for which we shall have
obtained from the Authority.”
THINK
, THINK,THINK
1)
Does the
act of UIIC / IBA to give 10 days’ notice for enhancing premium falls within
agreed clause 8 as referred above?????
2)
Does the
112% increase in premium for renewal falls within agreed clause 5.18 as
referred above?????
3) Does the act of UIIC is in
accordance with IRDAI (Health
Insurance) Regulations 2013 and IRDAI Protection Policyholders’ Interest)
Regulations 2002 / 2014 as amended from time to time as agreed at clause 6 of
the policy document?????
ANSWER
FROM A LAYMAN WILL ALSO BE “ NO- NEVER” THEN WHER IS THE CATCH
The answer is reflected in the last para of the UIIC
communication dated 22/09/2016,[copy attached] that prompted IBA to act
promptly and the said para reads as under:-
“We also propose that if the loss ratio is kept
under control and profit generated, if any, shall be shared equally".
Thanks & Regards
Pathak R K
****************************** ****************************** ****************************** **
Note
:- Author being resignee is not covered in the Health Insurance Policy
by the Bank, Despite Policy Documents issued by UIIC covers the
Resignee and 16 banks have extended the cover to this category. The
views expressed are based on the contents agreed in the Policy and
documents attached herein.
Unquote
Click on the following links
IS UIC IS A PUBLIC SECTOR INSURANCE COMPANY OR A LOOTING SECTOR COMPANY ? Are they not accountable for Unethical and Fraudulent practices as a service organization bound by the Consumer Protection Act.When IRDA is responsible to protect every citizen against exploitation by the Insurer company,how do they allow the UIC to dictate such inhuman rules at the very second year of its contract with another Public sector enterprise ? Even considering the Insuree as a very broad minded and liberal Indian Citizen,who is ready to pay an increased premium rate in the very second year of contract,he may pay an increase of the premium of only 40%,over the last year for the claim ratio of 180%,as per the chart given by UIC.If at all the UIC insists for 112% increase in the premium amount,as a benefeciary of the Health Insurance contract,the IBA SHOULD MAGNANIMOUSLY AGREE FOR ANY INCREASE IN THE PREMIUM AMOUNT FOR BOTH health cover policies of serving employees and retirees,as a goodwill gesture.
ReplyDeleteThe action of UIIC in fixing the renewal premium for Health Insurance Policies of Bank Pensioners are against the agreed settlement clauses and the unethical attitude of the UIIC should be condemned by all sectors. Being a Public Sector Insurance Company , how they can act in such a manner? The IRDA and IBA should intervene and find out a solution immediately otherwise large number of Bank Pensioners my decline to renew and in toto since the act of UIIV is unjustifiable.
ReplyDeleteS. Thanikachalam, Retiree of Canara Bank, Gobichettipalayam.
I simply believe like a lay man who soever pay the premium and irrespective of premium rate, the employee whether working or retired supposed to get the benefits of health care without fail.
ReplyDeleteHow to get out of this mess, should we write our respective Banks to not renew our policy or write to the Insurance company ? Please enlighten us !
ReplyDeleteRegards