Momentum Health lesson
THIS IS NOT ENOUGH
was doing during all of that time to ensure it was accepting premiums in good faith?
Note, in the event of a death-benefit claim, the client has no way of testing the efficacy of the policy before they need it. You only know if you’ll get what you have been paying for when it’s too late to do anything about it. There’s a reciprocal relationship in play. The insurer can argue the client must act in good faith too. If you take out a policy, it’s your responsibility to be honest when giving your medical history.
However, consider the variables. Firstly, you’re relying on memory. Can an insurer genuinely expect you to remember everything you may or may not have been diagnosed with, particularly if you don’t receive ongoing treatment?
You might also not know what’s significant and what isn’t. Terminology can also be an issue.
What about the role of the broker? There’s anecdotal evidence of brokers disregarding parts of a client’s medical history when filling out the medical history to ensure policies aren’t rejected, so they can earn commission.
It’s even possible that a doctor may have made a diagnosis you were never informed about. Given all that can go wrong, can insurers then still in good conscience place all the responsibility on the client? The industry must now face this question with more introspection.
In the short-term, this may require some kind of trade-off. Insurers must protect their risk; that may mean asking for more thorough medical tests upfront from everybody taking out a new policy.
The ultimate solution, however, is far simpler. Personal electronic medical records: a client’s entire medical history would be available from the start.