 Poster: A snowHead
|
|
@Layne, I have just read my MPI policy documents, and the medical stuff refers to being referred to a consultant, being under the care of a consultant, awaiting results of tests, or needing increase in medication doses for an existing condition. It says nothing about just going to visit your GP for a routine appointment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@Hells Bells, that's what I read also.
It's an interesting business this insurance malarkey. I'm sure underwriters want to know everything, as they can then balance the risk in their favour, however there is or should be a reasonableness test. IMO it's unreasonable to expect to have to up date them regarding routine GP visits, however Snowcard are quite explicit here. Having sorted this to my satisfaction, I recommend if you have a Snowcard Annual policy, contact Snowcard themselves (not the Health Screening line) before any trip if you or other individuals on your policy have made GP visits however routine and allow them to ascertain whether or not it merits disclosure. That way I assume you have a degree of protection should any claim be challenged.
It does concern me how there is a kind of scope creep in these areas and how many people could get caught by this type of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@needles,
| Quote: |
So hats off/chapeau to Snowcard, specifically Linda, who has sorted this for me.
Partly misunderstanding on my part, partly down to a daft screening process in my opinion but which I now understand a bit better. The company that does this is not part of Snowcard but aligned to the underwriters. |
Curious. Snowcard's underwriting decisions appear to be made by CSA Healthline (a subsiduary of Claims Settlement Agencies Ltd.) who trade from 308-314 London Road, Hadleigh, Essex, SS7 2DD. The Snowcard web site states that they trade from 308-314 London Road, Hadleigh, Essex, SS7 2DD.
| Quote: |
| Basically the disclosure of GP visits and other medical issues does need to be done for an existing annual policy but not for a renewal which was my scenario. |
... and I was told that it applies to both.
| Quote: |
| That way I assume you have a degree of protection should any claim be challenged. |
IMO, it isn't wise to rely on that when dealing with insurance companies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
PS Back in the day…. we developed a new insurance IT system and did a parallel run with it and the old system to prove that it produced the same results. They didn't; turned out that a different set of underwriters were involved with the two runs and had taken differing views of the risks which impacted the policies issued and the premiums to be collected figures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Being diagnosed with something once you've taken insurance is treated differently though. A couple of years ago my daughter was diagnosed with asthma after I'd taken out an annual policy with MPI. I rung them and they advised me to get something from her GP stating that she was ok to travel/ski (GP's letter was pretty mealy mouthed but didn't advise against). They didn't want to see this at the time but would have done if we'd had a claim. They also said that if she'd been diagnosed before taking out the policy it wouldn't even have been something we'd have had to advise them of.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
@jtr, interesting.
| Quote: |
| ... and I was told that it applies to both. |
That may be my wording. Disclosure does apply to both as you'd expect.
From what I was told, the difference is that for a new policy (a renewal) I am warranting that I don't have certain medical conditions based on the 9 health questions and the medical exclusions list in the health declaration on Snowcard's site. This is me affirming truth around material health conditions at policy start. I assume that this is the agreed acceptable process for gaining cover as that is the retailer's contractual process. Once the policy is active, the medical position of the insured parties might change, the risk may need to be reassessed and it's at that point where routine GP visits might have to be considered. When direct contact is made to the screeners regarding the health declaration there is an assumption that you have stepped outside the initial warrant, so all is considered. The screener has to assume this as apparently they don't just deal with Snowcard.
What does concern me is it is all a little unclear especially for laymen like me and it is yet another thing, on top of off-piste, skis thefts from outside restaurants and so on to worry about when examining policies. I've always understood that material health issues would affect insurance policies, however I've never been in a situation where routine GP visits and illnesses such as flu would ever be seriously considered material - this was an eye opener and I still don't feel 100% confident in my position following your post but then I rarely do with insurance.
I cant help thinking that it becomes a game of disclosure, in which the odds are stacked against the consumer and that doesn't sit well with me as I'm basically honest and want to be covered when and if the stuff hits the fan, like most people.
I don't think the level of clarity offered to insurance consumers today is acceptable, given the complexity of most policies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@needles,
| Quote: |
I cant help thinking that it becomes a game of disclosure, in which the odds are stacked against the consumer and that doesn't sit well with me as I'm basically honest and want to be covered when and if the stuff hits the fan, like most people.
I don't think the level of clarity offered to insurance consumers today is acceptable, given the complexity of most policies. |
I completely agree. Insurance companies (all of them, not picking on any one in particular) will explore the "non-disclosure" opportunities when looking at major pay outs, which is fair enough except that they don't make it easy to ensure that you comply with the, often opaque, T&Cs.
Personally, I self insure for everything (e.g. skis, luggage, cameras, phones etc) apart from major events e.g. medical, personal liability etc.
PS As for seeing a Doctor (rather than just GP) in the last 12 months, I always had to answer "yes" because I had an annual company medical as a matter of course. That seemed to confuse some of the checklist systems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What we really need is a level of protection around misrepresented warranties, not allowing an insurance contract to be cancelled if the misrepresentation wasn't fraudulent and did not increase the risks covered by the policy. That way, a huge claim for being rescued off a mountain and flown home having broken my back couldn't be cancelled because I didn't happen to declare my child's visit to the GP purely because their school might require proof of them having had tonsillitis or whatever. Maybe this is the case today but if so I'm not aware.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
| Quote: |
Personally, I self insure for everything (e.g. skis, luggage, cameras, phones etc) apart from major events e.g. medical, personal liability etc.
|
Me too. It's the biggies I'm worried about.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@needles, I don't think they would cancel your insurance for the circumstances you describe above if you had not declared a condition suffered by another insured person. Although it is a joint policy, each of you are usually treated separately in the event of a claim. Having made a claim for a medical emergency on behalf of my husband, the circumstances of the remaining family members and their health did not even come into it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
@Hells Bells, that's comforting at least and makes sense. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
After deliberation and following this thread decided this year to go with MPI for our annual multi trip insurance which I always buy in addition to carte neige as a 'belt and braces' approach to cover our off piste skiing. I bought via the on line process on Monday night. Paid and received the confirmation and documentation via email as expected and thought that was that for another year.
Tuesday morning email received asking me very politely as I was taking out a policy at his time of year whether I had intended to purchase winter sports cover as I hadn't actually done so!
A quick telephone call to the very helpful lady at MPI sorted the problem immediately and further documentation was issued to me including the winter sports cover. Whilst on the phone she also took the time to explain that I had probably gone for a higher level of cover than I really needed for my purposes and she adjusted the cost downwards for me.
I can't believe I missed the vital inclusion of the winter sports cover and my only excuse is that I was a bit bleary eyed by the time I had looked at various websites before actually deciding which one to purchase.
The real point though is that without MPI taking the trouble to check it out with me (not sure how many other on line purchases would do this?) I would have been completely oblivious to my error and potentially had a real shock if I'd had to make a claim for something which I incorrectly thought I was coverd for.
Great customer service from MPI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many thanks to all those who have commented above. After some research I had already come down to choosing between MPI and Snowcard. It seems I was on the right track - I just need to compare prices.
In previous years I took out SCGB insurance, but comments about their claims handling have led me to reconsider this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
