Should people like this be helped?

Forums › Off topic › Should people like this be helped?

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13

1630 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 277

Subscriber

Reply # 2088106 12-Sep-2018 11:12

One person supports this post

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

It gives you the opportunity to pay a higher premium and get it covered or look for other companies willing to cover.

The most disturbing thing I have heard was an example of an insurance company weaseling when they have no right to. Apparently a holiday in Europe with a NZ motorbike licence, they fell off and injured themselves. Put in claim and the insurance company denied because they did not have an international driving permit - which is in affect a document that is written in multiple languages to accompany your licence, there is no testing etc.

This Weasel behaviour is rubbish, and takes advantage of people who are ignorant.

tdgeek

13818 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

Trusted

Reply # 2088127 12-Sep-2018 11:17

itxtme:

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

It gives you the opportunity to pay a higher premium and get it covered or look for other companies willing to cover.

The most disturbing thing I have heard was an example of an insurance company weaseling when they have no right to. Apparently a holiday in Europe with a NZ motorbike licence, they fell off and injured themselves. Put in claim and the insurance company denied because they did not have an international driving permit - which is in affect a document that is written in multiple languages to accompany your licence, there is no testing etc.

This Weasel behaviour is rubbish, and takes advantage of people who are ignorant.

But its hard getting an international drivers licence.... :-) Last I had one it was $20, fill in a form. Its really just a standard piece of folded thin cardboard to say you have a drivers licence in your home country. Its a vastly bad technical loophole to deny the legitimacy of the driver.

rb99

1073 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 195

Subscriber

Reply # 2088130 12-Sep-2018 11:18

...reminds me of that old chestnut 'ignorance is no defence' - well, why not ?

rb99

Paul1977

2447 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 697

Reply # 2088144 12-Sep-2018 11:29

tdgeek:

Paul1977:

What I am reading here and seeing spouted on the news is the importance of declaring pre-existing conditions; but I feel like I am missing something.

I declare a pre-existing condition, and am told it will not be covered by my policy.

I fail to declare a pre-existing condition, if I try to claim on it my claim is denied.

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

Declare it, pay the extra for that cover

Sure, but what I mean is if you aren't planning on trying to get a pre-existing condition covered via higher premiums is there any point in declaring it?

E.g. If someone had a pre-existing heart condition and didn't declare it, can they be denied cover for a broken leg on the basis that the policy holder didn't disclose all known pre-existing conditions?

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2088154 12-Sep-2018 11:41

Paul1977:

What I am reading here and seeing spouted on the news is the importance of declaring pre-existing conditions; but I feel like I am missing something.

I declare a pre-existing condition, and am told it will not be covered by my policy.

I fail to declare a pre-existing condition, if I try to claim on it my claim is denied.

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

True.

Most (?) policies have a possibility of paying extra to get a known condition covered (if they accept it).

tdgeek

13818 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2510

Trusted

Reply # 2088155 12-Sep-2018 11:41

Paul1977:

tdgeek:

Paul1977:

What I am reading here and seeing spouted on the news is the importance of declaring pre-existing conditions; but I feel like I am missing something.

I declare a pre-existing condition, and am told it will not be covered by my policy.

I fail to declare a pre-existing condition, if I try to claim on it my claim is denied.

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

Declare it, pay the extra for that cover

Sure, but what I mean is if you aren't planning on trying to get a pre-existing condition covered via higher premiums is there any point in declaring it?

E.g. If someone had a pre-existing heart condition and didn't declare it, can they be denied cover for a broken leg on the basis that the policy holder didn't disclose all known pre-existing conditions?

Surely not, if the pre existing condition did not require treatment, or if it did not add to the main ailment/injury.

afe66

1873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 685

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2089181 12-Sep-2018 12:03

One person supports this post

Rules are rules.
If you don't follow the insurer rules don't complain if they cancel your coverage.

If you can afford to travel overseas then pay for insurance and follow the rules.

If you can't afford the premiums then stay in the country.

Government shouldn't get involved at all.

Rikkitic

Glurp
8662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3980

Subscriber

Reply # 2089189 12-Sep-2018 12:07

itxtme:

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

It gives you the opportunity to pay a higher premium and get it covered or look for other companies willing to cover.

The most disturbing thing I have heard was an example of an insurance company weaseling when they have no right to. Apparently a holiday in Europe with a NZ motorbike licence, they fell off and injured themselves. Put in claim and the insurance company denied because they did not have an international driving permit - which is in affect a document that is written in multiple languages to accompany your licence, there is no testing etc.

This Weasel behaviour is rubbish, and takes advantage of people who are ignorant.

According to urban legend, some insurance companies have been known to deny all claims, on the principle that most people won't have the means or determination to sue. Even when the company loses court cases to those who do sue, they still come out ahead.

As the saying goes, I am not a lawyer but I believe (don't know for certain) that an international driving license does not have any special legal standing. It is an authenticated translation, nothing more. It is a convenience for those countries that do not speak the language of the license, but not having one does not invalidate the national license (I think). So you can legally drive in the UK on your NZ license without the International one because the cops can read the conditions on your NZ one. In a country like Holland, where virtually everyone speaks adequate English, it also would not be an issue. It might become an issue in other countries where English is not so widespread, and you might have to go to court (with a translation) to satisfy any local legal requirements, but again, this would be more of an inconvenience than a legal matter. As long as you have a valid national license, and can prove that when you have to, I don't think an International license is actually a requirement (someone feel free to correct me). If that is so, then the insurance company was just trying it on to see what they could get away with, and probably breaking the law in the process.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2089223 12-Sep-2018 12:41

Rikkitic:

itxtme:

So... why is it so important to declare it if it will not be covered either way?

It gives you the opportunity to pay a higher premium and get it covered or look for other companies willing to cover.

The most disturbing thing I have heard was an example of an insurance company weaseling when they have no right to. Apparently a holiday in Europe with a NZ motorbike licence, they fell off and injured themselves. Put in claim and the insurance company denied because they did not have an international driving permit - which is in affect a document that is written in multiple languages to accompany your licence, there is no testing etc.

This Weasel behaviour is rubbish, and takes advantage of people who are ignorant.

According to urban legend, some insurance companies have been known to deny all claims, on the principle that most people won't have the means or determination to sue. Even when the company loses court cases to those who do sue, they still come out ahead.

As the saying goes, I am not a lawyer but I believe (don't know for certain) that an international driving license does not have any special legal standing. It is an authenticated translation, nothing more. It is a convenience for those countries that do not speak the language of the license, but not having one does not invalidate the national license (I think). So you can legally drive in the UK on your NZ license without the International one because the cops can read the conditions on your NZ one. In a country like Holland, where virtually everyone speaks adequate English, it also would not be an issue. It might become an issue in other countries where English is not so widespread, and you might have to go to court (with a translation) to satisfy any local legal requirements, but again, this would be more of an inconvenience than a legal matter. As long as you have a valid national license, and can prove that when you have to, I don't think an International license is actually a requirement (someone feel free to correct me). If that is so, then the insurance company was just trying it on to see what they could get away with, and probably breaking the law in the process.

Yep. Unless the policy says you have to have the IDL. If they just said you have to be driving legally then your NZ licence does that and the insurer is being dishonest. I expect if any company behaved that way the bad press would hurt them fairly quickly. Certainly I would never go near Youi insurance for this reason (and lots here at GZ have said the same thing) as their reputation is terrible.

Rikkitic

Glurp
8662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3980

Subscriber

Reply # 2089238 12-Sep-2018 12:59

kryptonjohn:

Yep. Unless the policy says you have to have the IDL. If they just said you have to be driving legally then your NZ licence does that and the insurer is being dishonest. I expect if any company behaved that way the bad press would hurt them fairly quickly. Certainly I would never go near Youi insurance for this reason (and lots here at GZ have said the same thing) as their reputation is terrible.

Interesting you say that. They got pulled up for misleading advertising and on that basis alone I would never have anything to do with them. I always use 1Cover. I think they are a great company.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2089239 12-Sep-2018 13:02

Rikkitic:

kryptonjohn:

Yep. Unless the policy says you have to have the IDL. If they just said you have to be driving legally then your NZ licence does that and the insurer is being dishonest. I expect if any company behaved that way the bad press would hurt them fairly quickly. Certainly I would never go near Youi insurance for this reason (and lots here at GZ have said the same thing) as their reputation is terrible.

Interesting you say that. They got pulled up for misleading advertising and on that basis alone I would never have anything to do with them. I always use 1Cover. I think they are a great company.

Good to know. So far hadn't considered them because their TV adds are a bit irritating :-)

Rikkitic

Glurp
8662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3980

Subscriber

Reply # 2089268 12-Sep-2018 13:38

One person supports this post

To return to the question, yes, I think people like this should be helped. There have been some unkind suggestions made about this lady's motives and the usual bleatings about setting precedents, but a situation like this will always be exceptional and I think exceptional circumstances warrant exceptional measures. The poor woman is dead. She was made to die in a foreign hospital in a foreign land. A more compassionate response would have been at least a greater willingness to bring her home, regardless of the cost or who had to pay for it. When people are in trouble, you help them. You don't ask if it was their own fault or whether they took adequate precautionary measures. We spend fortunes every year lifting people off mountains or plucking them from the sea. Maybe some of the cost is recovered, but no-one asks in advance if they can pay, or refuses to help because they brought it on themselves.

If you were tramping in the hills and you came upon someone having a heart attack, would you just ignore them and carry on? What matters for me in this case isn't the specifics of this woman's medical condition, or whether is was possible to return her to NZ, or whether enough money was raised to cover the costs, or whether she was trying to pull a fast one on the insurer. What matters is the apparent reluctance of many people to help someone in need, and the reaching for justifications that it was somehow her fault anyway. I would have hoped for a little more generosity of spirit here.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 970

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2089273 12-Sep-2018 13:49

I have no reason to think their motives were good or bad. I just believe that a contract is a contract and if prices and profitability are set on that contract then if the insurer starts covering things outside of the contract will go broke. In addition they would be sending a message that they will cover stuff that their policy is not covering etc.

It's great for you or me to voluntarily help someone but some people seem to expect the insurer (or government) to do so. They simply cannot. Alternatively they could put the price up and cover existing conditions. This is available now by their discretion.

afe66

1873 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 685

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 2089294 12-Sep-2018 14:09

Sorry Rickiti.

Your hip replacement has been cancelled because the funds were used to pay for treatment of someone who hurt themselves overseas but couldn't be bothered insuring themselves. Thousands on tickets accommodation but wouldnt pay for insurance but look at my instagram photos of the hotel.

Everyone makes decisions in their own interests. That's why you spend money on the internet each month instead of using the cash to sponsor a starving child in Africa. You value for posting here over the life of a _child_ 😱 OMG.

I think there would have been more sympathy if their campaign for help had said to the effect " we stuffed up, we should have done x y z but we didn't. It's our fault, can you help us." Rather than muttering about insurance claims being declined and casting aspersions about the industry.

Rikkitic

Glurp
8662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3980

Subscriber

Reply # 2089344 12-Sep-2018 14:36

2 people support this post

Well then, I guess the world sure got even with them! Undeserving obfuscatory muttering types that they are.

I reject your reality and substitute my own. - Adam Savage

1 | ... | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13