Irda — united india insurance mediclaim policy to iba for the retired bank officers and employes

Address:

Jaipur, Rajasthan, 302021

I would like to bring to your notice a very serious and unimaginable blunder in quoting premium for the group policy for retiree bank officers by united india insurance company to be issued to iba for all the member banks. This policy was started from 2015-16 and renewed from 2016, 2017 and 2017-18 premium was as under.
From this you will be able to understand the position and the methods being adopted by the insurance company for deciding the premium.

Sl. No. Year sum insured (Rs) premium amt. Premium amt.
With domiciliary without domiciliary
01 2015-16 4, 00, 000 7, 500 7500
02 2016-17 4, 00, 000 20, 010 16025
03 2017-18 4, 00, 000 36, 998 16443
(Super top up) 5, 00, 000 na 3, 806
2018-19 4, 00, 000 82, 273 28572
(Super top up) 5, 00, 000 na 5, 259

1. The insurance company had raised the premium every year as shown herein above:
2. The important factor is that as to how the premium can be revised every year and how the regulator is approving such an increase? Which norms will permit such a steep rise in the premium of one category of staff/ex-staff?
3. In the year 2017 the company took an excuse that the premium and claim ration is high for almost doubling the premium for the retiree officers.
4. Now in 2018 again they have mentioned the excuse of high ratio of premium and claim for quoting 123% rise in the premium for the retirees. Can there be claim more than the sum insured?
5. But have a look at what they are quoting:
A. For the policy of 4 lacks without domiciliary treatment the premium conveyed is rs. 28, 572.
B. With domiciliary treatment of 10% of sum assured within total sum insured of the policy of 4, 00, 000/-i. E. Rs. 40, 000/- the premium will go up to 82, 273 i. E. Increase by rs. 53, 701/- so if you do not opt for domiciliary treatment you are required to pay rs.28, 572 for 4, 00, 000/- if you take domiciliary than this 28, 572 will be charged for the sum assured of rs. 3, 60, 000 and you have to pay additional rs. 53, 701/- for allowing the domiciliary treatment of rs. 40, 000/-?
C. When company quoting the premium of 28, 572/- without domiciliary for 4 lacks how the premium will remain same for 3, 60, 000/-? The premium for 3, 60, 000 allowable for hospitalization will have to be reduced for rs. 40, 000 proportionately to rs. 25, 714.. The retiree is required to pay for domiciliary treatment of rs. 40, 000/- a separate additional premium of rs. 53, 701+2858 as mentioned earlier. How this aspect remained to be taken care?
D. Can anyone understand and explain how the premium of insurance can be more than the eligibility to claim insurance amount? Which rules and guidelines of the regulator irda permit this as claimed by the uiic in their communication? This type of quotation is unprecedented and unbelievable.
E. How the claim ratio can be made an excuse for quoting more than 100% premium amount against the insured amount?
F. If this way the increase in premium by the iba is to be considered the insurance company will double the premium next year and so on.
G. It is a serious breach of trust and definite case of the deliberately forcing the retirees by the company to ensure that all retirees are kept out of the policy.

6. Moreover, as mentioned above, when the amount of premium is separate for the amount to be considered for domiciliary treatment i. E. 10% or 40, 000 from the policy of 4, 00, 000/, - the amount of premium for remaining 90% amount i. E. Rs. 3, 60, 000/- cannot remain same. The company has done this excess charge in the year 2015, 2016, and 2017 also which has to be refunded with interest to the insured.
7. The same company is offering the policy to the serving employees at a much less premium. For the sum assured of rs. 4, 00, 000/- the policy covers the domiciliary treatment of the officer, spouse, children and parents of the employee. But the retirees are permitted the policy for self and spouse only. Why this discrimination?
8. Whether the parents of the serving employee remain young and are not old like the retired employee? If the serving employees are more than 40 years of age than in 99% cases the parents must be more than 60 years of age are they not old like retired employees?
9. If we just imagine that some employee takes a policy as serving employee at the age of 59 years and his parents are of the age of near to 80 years. He will get the policy, till he becomes 60 years, at a premium applicable to serving employees for self, spouse, parents and children also with domiciliary treatment and the premium will be paid by the bank. But look at his plight next year. When he retires before the renewal in october, the renewal will be for self and spouse only, premium has to be borne by the retired employee and the premium will jump to 82, 273. Don’t you agree it is surprising and astonishing?
Please take some immediate corrective step[s and the company may please cbe stopped from looting the bank retirees.
We are confident you will consider the matter as serious and will give justice to us. The employees who could not take the policy due this beyond reach increase in premium, please advise the company to permitting them also after making necessary corrections in the premium.

Thanks, r. C. Agarwal
A, retiree bank officer