Insured But No Cover

[colinneil]

Always read the small print, how many times do we hear that .How many people bother to read it ,not many, i was in pattaya memorial hospital a few years ago illness not accident fully covered with insurance, private room great service , i went for a wander 1 morning saw young farang (german i think) handcuffed to the bed ,broken leg, what ! iask him why no insurance no money cannot pay waiting for family send money pay the bill. as i said before ALWAYS READ SMALL PRINT

[stevenl]

He should also know that if he travels in many tour vans he will not be covered as it is not a scheduled service. He should know to that most of the tour buses intercity will not be covered for the same reason.

Please don't write nonsense here. No travel insurance will exclude traveling in a not schedule service.

[petercallen]

Any pointers to a decent insurance company name then???

they do not exist ...... someone please give me a happy story about an insurance company ( other than a minor car bingle) especially when it comes to personal accident and sickness or travel insurance ... lying thieves .....one rung lower than banks and two below lawyers

I have personal accident insurance with the SCB, i have had 2 claims one involving a motorbike

Both times i used the BPH and the insurance payed all costs with no hassles

wait until you have a claim that far outways the policy you have paid ....red flag !!! the first step is for the insurance company to get out of it with little or no cost ... example ... you break your hip in the accident and need a replacement ... they will ask for all your prior medical reports , if they find u have had anything , anything that u did not disclose ... the smallest issue, they will decline your claim because of non disclosure on your behalf ..the best u can hope for is a refund on your premium.They know you will not try and take them to the courts, because they have more lawyers and all the money from other premiums to drag it out until your dead if necessary ... remember we take out insurance in case of a major accident or injury , the small stuff most people can handle without insurance ...the companies agenda is to pay the small claims and fight the big ones ...its how they make money ....

Maximum pay out for any one accident 100,000 baht, that will not cover a broken hip

Death by accident 1,000,000 baht

I am happy with the cover the bank gives me and disclosed everything

[cdmtdm]

Pete ..100k will not get u far in a private hospital here ... 1,000,000 baht once your dead ,your relatives will fight to get it that is for sure !!!

[petercallen]

Pete ..100k will not get u far in a private hospital here ... 1,000,000 baht once your dead ,your relatives will fight to get it that is for sure !!!

I have other insurance as well which has unlimited payouts for hospitals and treatment

On that insurance if you make more than 3 claims i think it is in 2 years they can refuse to renew it

So i used local accident insurance foe small claims which only costs 4000 baht a year

The 1M baht goes to my wife as beneficiary of that policy

[Old Croc]

His insurance probably didn't cover driving a hovercraft or, sky-diving. Do they expect the travel agent to point that out, too?

I'm fairly sure I've seen sky diving in the exclusions on some of the policies I've had.

Never hovercrafts however.

[madmitch]

Too much generalisation regarding the 'unscrupulous' activities of insurance companies for me to comment on each one.

If you have a genuine claim that is not excluded under the terms and conditions of the policy you will be paid.

Insurers know that people exaggerate claims, therefore they investigate claims thoroughly.

It is up to individuals to disclose any pre-existing conditions and previous claims. It is requested on application forms and if you don't disclose you are likely to have your claim denied.

Yes, insurers do use lawyers to fight contentious claims but it is a myth that they will spend a fortune on legal fees just to avoid paying a small claim. There's no point; it's just simple economics.

[petercallen]

Too much generalisation regarding the 'unscrupulous' activities of insurance companies for me to comment on each one.

If you have a genuine claim that is not excluded under the terms and conditions of the policy you will be paid.

Insurers know that people exaggerate claims, therefore they investigate claims thoroughly.

It is up to individuals to disclose any pre-existing conditions and previous claims. It is requested on application forms and if you don't disclose you are likely to have your claim denied.

Yes, insurers do use lawyers to fight contentious claims but it is a myth that they will spend a fortune on legal fees just to avoid paying a small claim. There's no point; it's just simple economics.

I agree its the unscrupulous policyholders who make false claims who have there claims refused

and there are plenty of those around

[NBD]

I've never come across anyone whose surname was Kenzie. Lot's of McKenzie, but never just Kenzie. Any idea where the name comes from?

here you go

http://www.surnamedb.../Surname/Kenzie

Thanks for that.

Interesting link between surnames and personal taxation.

[jocko]

I feel sorry for the young man. I guess he should have read the policy. But the travel agent/insurance salesman should have mentioned it, one would think.

She was also concerned that he may not be able to leave Thailand until the bill was paid.

Read more: http://www.watoday.c...l#ixzz1zjpQU3gI

I would say that is a big concern as I'm pretty sure he won't be able to leave until his bill is paid.

Today I was talking to, I guess you would call her " guest relations manager " in the matter of...

http://www.thaivisa....huket-hospital/

Part of the conversation was her statement " that most people regard us as a hospital, that we may well be but first of all we are a business and like any other ensure, by whatever means, that our patients debts will be paid before discharge.

Blunt Facts.

I have heard that in some cases that if you have had a motorbike accident ( NOT INSURED) they alter the paperwork to make it look that you have had some other type of accident that you can claim on.

[KarenBravo]

I agree its the unscrupulous policyholders who make false claims who have there claims refused

and there are plenty of those around

Yes, seems to be the Australian national sport of those that come to Phuket.

[sportsman69]

I feel sorry for the young man. I guess he should have read the policy. But the travel agent/insurance salesman should have mentioned it, one would think.

She was also concerned that he may not be able to leave Thailand until the bill was paid.

Read more: http://www.watoday.c...l#ixzz1zjpQU3gI

I would say that is a big concern as I'm pretty sure he won't be able to leave until his bill is paid.

Today I was talking to, I guess you would call her " guest relations manager " in the matter of...

http://www.thaivisa....huket-hospital/

Part of the conversation was her statement " that most people regard us as a hospital, that we may well be but first of all we are a business and like any other ensure, by whatever means, that our patients debts will be paid before discharge.

Blunt Facts.

I have heard that in some cases that if you have had a motorbike accident ( NOT INSURED) they alter the paperwork to make it look that you have had some other type of accident that you can claim on.

I wouldn't doubt this in the slightest. Anything they can do to make money is fair game to them. Easier to pad the bill as well. You must remember this is Thailand where money is next to God especially where some poor banged up farang is involved.

[sportsman69]

I agree its the unscrupulous policyholders who make false claims who have there claims refused

and there are plenty of those around

Yes, seems to be the Australian national sport of those that come to Phuket.

WOOHA ! Mate. Were talking about a bit of insurance scamology as practised by every nationality on earth. Are you saying the Brits aren't into this also ?

At least we don't come here and stick knives in girlfriends and American ex service men who win a fair fight and kill them like the Brits, Aldhouse and Mick the Pom.

Is that the British national sport?

[KarenBravo]

The Aussies are the ones that seem to get caught by the BiB.

Yes, murder seems to be our specialty.

[cdmtdm]

Too much generalisation regarding the 'unscrupulous' activities of insurance companies for me to comment on each one.

If you have a genuine claim that is not excluded under the terms and conditions of the policy you will be paid.

Insurers know that people exaggerate claims, therefore they investigate claims thoroughly.

It is up to individuals to disclose any pre-existing conditions and previous claims. It is requested on application forms and if you don't disclose you are likely to have your claim denied.

Yes, insurers do use lawyers to fight contentious claims but it is a myth that they will spend a fortune on legal fees just to avoid paying a small claim. There's no point; it's just simple economics.

sounds like words from an insurance agent or ex agent ....your points are crap

point 1/ how many members have used an agent and taken the word of the agent about the fine print ? its ok no worries dont worry about that you will be fine blah blah meanwhile the agent collects commision and one day when the shit hits the fan the agent disappears

point 2/ the exaggerated claims are already factored into the hefty price of insurance for all holders

point 3/ the insurance company will always find a way out when the numbers dont work for them, regardless of disclosure by the client , if you forget one trip to the doctor your out !! ... yes its economics

point4/ no they will only fight the big claims again greed !!!

in my opinion insurance agents need to be held liable , they are selling a product that in many cases will never be paid out and they know it ...

so please dont give me the poor insurance company crap ... bankers with no spine ..

[cdmtdm]

The Aussies are the ones that seem to get caught by the BiB.

Yes, murder seems to be our specialty.

Too much generalisation regarding the 'unscrupulous' activities of insurance companies for me to comment on each one.

If you have a genuine claim that is not excluded under the terms and conditions of the policy you will be paid.

Insurers know that people exaggerate claims, therefore they investigate claims thoroughly.

It is up to individuals to disclose any pre-existing conditions and previous claims. It is requested on application forms and if you don't disclose you are likely to have your claim denied.

Yes, insurers do use lawyers to fight contentious claims but it is a myth that they will spend a fortune on legal fees just to avoid paying a small claim. There's no point; it's just simple economics.

I agree its the unscrupulous policyholders who make false claims who have there claims refused

and there are plenty of those around

you have no clue pete ....

[petercallen]

The Aussies are the ones that seem to get caught by the BiB.

Yes, murder seems to be our specialty.

Too much generalisation regarding the 'unscrupulous' activities of insurance companies for me to comment on each one.

If you have a genuine claim that is not excluded under the terms and conditions of the policy you will be paid.

Insurers know that people exaggerate claims, therefore they investigate claims thoroughly.

It is up to individuals to disclose any pre-existing conditions and previous claims. It is requested on application forms and if you don't disclose you are likely to have your claim denied.

Yes, insurers do use lawyers to fight contentious claims but it is a myth that they will spend a fortune on legal fees just to avoid paying a small claim. There's no point; it's just simple economics.

I agree its the unscrupulous policyholders who make false claims who have there claims refused

and there are plenty of those around

you have no clue pete ....

I know people who have been refused claims on both travel and workers comp insurance

They were trying to scam the insurance companies and got caught out

Whats your experience it any mate

[cdmtdm]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

[madmitch]

Too much generalisation regarding the 'unscrupulous' activities of insurance companies for me to comment on each one.

If you have a genuine claim that is not excluded under the terms and conditions of the policy you will be paid.

Insurers know that people exaggerate claims, therefore they investigate claims thoroughly.

It is up to individuals to disclose any pre-existing conditions and previous claims. It is requested on application forms and if you don't disclose you are likely to have your claim denied.

Yes, insurers do use lawyers to fight contentious claims but it is a myth that they will spend a fortune on legal fees just to avoid paying a small claim. There's no point; it's just simple economics.

sounds like words from an insurance agent or ex agent ....your points are crap

point 1/ how many members have used an agent and taken the word of the agent about the fine print ? its ok no worries dont worry about that you will be fine blah blah meanwhile the agent collects commision and one day when the shit hits the fan the agent disappears

point 2/ the exaggerated claims are already factored into the hefty price of insurance for all holders

point 3/ the insurance company will always find a way out when the numbers dont work for them, regardless of disclosure by the client , if you forget one trip to the doctor your out !! ... yes its economics

point4/ no they will only fight the big claims again greed !!!

in my opinion insurance agents need to be held liable , they are selling a product that in many cases will never be paid out and they know it ...

so please dont give me the poor insurance company crap ... bankers with no spine ..

1. Did I mention insurance agents anywhere? A lot are only there for a sale and do not know the ins and outs of the policies and this is wrong. However it is up to the insured to read the small print.

2. Absolutely correct, so everyone pays more premium to cover fraudulent and exaggerated claims, therefore the greed and criminality of some gets paid for by the rest of the insurance-buying public.

3. You think that if you want to.

4. There is no point in fighting a genuine claim as the insurance company will lose. Many claims are extremely complex and these are the ones that make fortunes for the lawyers.

In the UK agents are regularly sued for mis-selling policies. They are now controlled by the FSA. In Thailand it is very different and most are no more than untrained salespersons.

[Jimi007]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

I'll have to agree with you. They will pay up to some amount they determine and won't budge. Then you hire an attorney and they budge a little more, then that's it. Unless you want to do battle in court with their team of attorneys... And lose more money in attorney fees than you would ever gain.

[LivinginKata]

inflammatory post removed

[cdmtdm]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

I'll have to agree with you. They will pay up to some amount they determine and won't budge. Then you hire an attorney and they budge a little more, then that's it. Unless you want to do battle in court with their team of attorneys... And lose more money in attorney fees than you would ever gain.

again please anybody give us some good insurance stories ( not cars /bikes) ..do u think this young kid read the pds ? he would have assumed the agent had him buying the correct insurance and trusted him , its the agents duty of care to advise and inform the correct insurance policy for each individual ,,, good and bad ... its what he gets paid a commission for ... if we all read the pds and took it to a lawyer to interpret we would never take out insurance , because its all for the insurance company ...

[madmitch]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

I'll have to agree with you. They will pay up to some amount they determine and won't budge. Then you hire an attorney and they budge a little more, then that's it. Unless you want to do battle in court with their team of attorneys... And lose more money in attorney fees than you would ever gain.

again please anybody give us some good insurance stories ( not cars /bikes) ..do u think this young kid read the pds ? he would have assumed the agent had him buying the correct insurance and trusted him , its the agents duty of care to advise and inform the correct insurance policy for each individual ,,, good and bad ... its what he gets paid a commission for ... if we all read the pds and took it to a lawyer to interpret we would never take out insurance , because its all for the insurance company ...

I wouldn't know where to start.

You read stories all the time about ridiculous amounts paid to third party claimants in the US in particular.

After major catastrophes, loss adjusters are on site extremely quickly and undisputed claims are paid in a very short time.

People are rehoused after fires, floods etc and the insurers pay the costs immediately.

As for me, my last 'claim' was not covered and was correctly denied by the insurance company (Bangkok Insurance). Theft from the house by someone with access to a key, probably the Burmese labourer or a friend who had fitted the lock. Yes, I tried to claim but didn't go and put scratch marks near the door to indicate forcible entry. I know the claim wasn't covered under the terms and conditions of the policy but there's no harm in trying!

Believe me, most genuine non-third party claims are undisputed and paid in full or pretty close to it. Of course it's those that are declined or disputed that give insurance companies such a bad name. You have obviously been involved in such a case and I have been involved in hundreds from the other side of the fence.

[simple1]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

I'll have to agree with you. They will pay up to some amount they determine and won't budge. Then you hire an attorney and they budge a little more, then that's it. Unless you want to do battle in court with their team of attorneys... And lose more money in attorney fees than you would ever gain.

again please anybody give us some good insurance stories ( not cars /bikes) ..do u think this young kid read the pds ? he would have assumed the agent had him buying the correct insurance and trusted him , its the agents duty of care to advise and inform the correct insurance policy for each individual ,,, good and bad ... its what he gets paid a commission for ... if we all read the pds and took it to a lawyer to interpret we would never take out insurance , because its all for the insurance company ...

Give it a break - is the agent going to go through every scenario that would/would not be covered by a policy valued at around $150/$250? Get real...

[cdmtdm]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

I'll have to agree with you. They will pay up to some amount they determine and won't budge. Then you hire an attorney and they budge a little more, then that's it. Unless you want to do battle in court with their team of attorneys... And lose more money in attorney fees than you would ever gain.

again please anybody give us some good insurance stories ( not cars /bikes) ..do u think this young kid read the pds ? he would have assumed the agent had him buying the correct insurance and trusted him , its the agents duty of care to advise and inform the correct insurance policy for each individual ,,, good and bad ... its what he gets paid a commission for ... if we all read the pds and took it to a lawyer to interpret we would never take out insurance , because its all for the insurance company ...

Give it a break - is the agent going to go through every scenario that would/would not be covered by a policy valued at around $150/$250? Get real...

why not ? a few questions to the customer and some honest answers from the agent 10 minutes work .... easy money and its what they get paid a commission for ..... but they dont give a shit just take the money and run....

[simple1]

Quote "why not ? a few questions to the customer and some honest answers from the agent 10 minutes work .... easy money and its what they get paid a commission for ..... but they dont give a shit just take the money and run...."

And you know what if they don't ask a question that relates to a circumstance where they wish to make a claim, many will say "I was conned, money grabbers etc etc" But there again most buy travel insurance via the internet as it's cheaper to do so.

[geriatrickid]

I really do not understand the logic of some of the arguments here. It seems some do not understand what an insurance policy is. It is a contract to transfer risk. One party says to another, I have risk that I want to transfer to you. The other party says, ok, I'll accept that transfer, but it will be under the conditions as set out in the contract and I will charge XXX for the transaction. No one forces the ceding party to transfer the risk. If there is no risk, then the party shouldn't try to transfer it then should he? It is the responsibility of the person transferring the risk to read the contract.

Some of the arguments presented read as demands that insurers should be obliged to accept the risks someone wants to transfer at the rate the person waqnts to pay. Well, guess what, if there isn't any risk, and you don't think the risk is worth something, then keep the risk yourself.

Oh nooooo, we can't do that. Why not, we don't want a loss if something happens.

If the events of an ensuing incident are excluded by the terms of the contract then, it is not the insurance company's fault. Where there are disputes it is usually because the insured does not properly support or document the claim. An insurer will deny a claim when the basis is fuzzy or not properly documented. Many of an insurance policy's exclusions are established in law and are not under the control of the insurer. For example, the insurability of illegal acts, the insurability of latent defect etc. If someone is not legally authorized to drive a vehicle and then has an incident, why would an insurer be expected to pay? Is it really an insurer's responsibility to tell an insured, oh by the way, you have to hold a valid driver's permit? For everyone claiming that the insurer ripped them off, there are 10 more people that padded their claims or claimed for losses that didn't occur. It's quite simple. If you want to collect under a policy, prove your claim. It is no different than any other contract in that you have to prove you sustained a loss, with the difference that insurance contracts are actually weighted in an insured's favour.

[Jimi007]

i have first hand experience Pete involving millions ... with one of the most reputable insurers in the world ...fought it for two years ... it got down to who had the most money to fight it in the courts ... in those two years what i found would make you understand why i am so anti insurance ... again i ask anyone to tell me of a happy insurance outcome involving big money , where the insurance company actually did what u thought u signed up for ...

I'll have to agree with you. They will pay up to some amount they determine and won't budge. Then you hire an attorney and they budge a little more, then that's it. Unless you want to do battle in court with their team of attorneys... And lose more money in attorney fees than you would ever gain.

again please anybody give us some good insurance stories ( not cars /bikes) ..do u think this young kid read the pds ? he would have assumed the agent had him buying the correct insurance and trusted him , its the agents duty of care to advise and inform the correct insurance policy for each individual ,,, good and bad ... its what he gets paid a commission for ... if we all read the pds and took it to a lawyer to interpret we would never take out insurance , because its all for the insurance company ...

I wouldn't know where to start.

You read stories all the time about ridiculous amounts paid to third party claimants in the US in particular.

After major catastrophes, loss adjusters are on site extremely quickly and undisputed claims are paid in a very short time.

People are rehoused after fires, floods etc and the insurers pay the costs immediately.

Yes and most of those large claims for coffee burns (McDonalds) etc were overturned on appeal in the US. Yes the insurance companies do have better attorneys! Are you employed by a US insurance company or what? Flood insurance in the US is a totally independent insurance from fire/homeowners and most people are not covered by flood insurance. Earthquake insurance is yet another separate insurance that most people don't have, because it's expensive!

[madmitch]

I wouldn't know where to start.

You read stories all the time about ridiculous amounts paid to third party claimants in the US in particular.

After major catastrophes, loss adjusters are on site extremely quickly and undisputed claims are paid in a very short time.

People are rehoused after fires, floods etc and the insurers pay the costs immediately.

Yes and most of those large claims for coffee burns (McDonalds) etc were overturned on appeal in the US. Yes the insurance companies do have better attorneys! Are you employed by a US insurance company or what? Flood insurance in the US is a totally independent insurance from fire/homeowners and most people are not covered by flood insurance. Earthquake insurance is yet another separate insurance that most people don't have, because it's expensive!

Not necessarily overturned but, yes, many are appealed with a much reduced, often more realistic, settlement but still in the millions of dollars.

I don't work for a US insurance company and never have but I did deal with US insurance and reinsurance for many years.

Correct, the US national flood insurance scheme provides cover up to a certain limit but there is no such scheme in Thailand (what happened to that idea?), the UK and most other countries. Maybe I should have used windstorm as my example.

And yes, quake coverage if you happen to live in a quake zone is expensive. As Geriatric Kid quite rightly stated, the consumer is paying for a transfer of risk. The higher the risk, the higher the premium.

Didn't expect a discussion on elements of insurance in the Phuket forum. Maybe the last half of this thread should be under the Insurance category.

[Jimi007]

I wouldn't know where to start.

You read stories all the time about ridiculous amounts paid to third party claimants in the US in particular.

After major catastrophes, loss adjusters are on site extremely quickly and undisputed claims are paid in a very short time.

People are rehoused after fires, floods etc and the insurers pay the costs immediately.

Yes and most of those large claims for coffee burns (McDonalds) etc were overturned on appeal in the US. Yes the insurance companies do have better attorneys! Are you employed by a US insurance company or what? Flood insurance in the US is a totally independent insurance from fire/homeowners and most people are not covered by flood insurance. Earthquake insurance is yet another separate insurance that most people don't have, because it's expensive!

Not necessarily overturned but, yes, many are appealed with a much reduced, often more realistic, settlement but still in the millions of dollars.

I don't work for a US insurance company and never have but I did deal with US insurance and reinsurance for many years.

Correct, the US national flood insurance scheme provides cover up to a certain limit but there is no such scheme in Thailand (what happened to that idea?), the UK and most other countries. Maybe I should have used windstorm as my example.

And yes, quake coverage if you happen to live in a quake zone is expensive. As Geriatric Kid quite rightly stated, the consumer is paying for a transfer of risk. The higher the risk, the higher the premium.

Didn't expect a discussion on elements of insurance in the Phuket forum. Maybe the last half of this thread should be under the Insurance category.

I was only responding to your comments. I have had to pay and deal with US insurance companies most of my life. I think of insurance as betting against myself. But I pay because I can't afford to lose everything I've worked for.