 Of all the existing insurance policies in the industry today, payment protection insurance seems to be one of the most controversial,. Commonly called as PPI, this insurance policy promises to cover for the payment of the insureds debts for a certain period of time if the person insured happens to lose their means of paying their debts. These include involuntary losing a job, getting involved in an accident, and being diagnosed of a medical condition that renders him or her incapable of doing regular work anymore. While this policy started as an option that policyholders could avail of, there are a lot of lending institutions that require the purchase of PPI as one of the pre-requisite before approving a person's application of a loan or mortgage. In fact most of lending institutions in the United Kingdom today have divisions which were specifically created to sell PPI to people who borrow money from the same institution.As a result, payment protection insurance companies have been under fire for a lot of reasons. Authorities say that they have one of the dirtiest marketing tactics ever made in the history of selling insurance policies. These strategies include selling these policies without the customers full knowledge, which usually includes omitting or exaggerating some important information regarding the policy. Furthermore, because consumers rarely check the entirety of the insurance policy, payment protection insurance companies deliberately print a lot of exclusionary clauses using the small print strategy to make it unbelievably hard for a normal person to immediately spot these exclusions. However, even with all the allegations that the insurance industry faces, it has remained steadfast, treating everyday business as usual. How, you might ask, can insurance companies find a way to escape the legal system given the number of people who are clamoring for punitive damages from the courts? The answer is simple. While the insurance industry is not perfect, it is not homogenous. Like any other industry, there are companies which resort to dirty tactics. However, hope is not lost because there are also a number of payment protection insurance companies which engage in honest business by taking the customers best interest to heart. At the end of the day, no one can really judge whether the industry is more beneficial or detrimental. Sometimes, the failure of the entire insurance industry should be shared responsibly by the buyer and payment protection insurance company. If people were more vigilant, these practices would not have had proliferated in the first place. Sometimes, the desire to get a loan approved overshadows the intuitive nature of people to be inquisitive of the things they buy. Additionally, while there are a lot of pending cases against insurance companies, majority of policy holders who claim to have been deceived, misinformed, and deserving of being covered do not fight for their right to get back the premiums paid they paid for.  If people were more aggressive, then the class suit against these companies would be stronger. This can potentially lead to more inquiries regarding the pros and cons of the policy, which might even involve the passing of more stringent legislation to tighten the government's grip on these companies. This is not to say, however, that companies should be able to run away with these practices. What the industry needs is a more vigilant conglomeration of consumer groups and responsible payment protection insurance companies. If that happens, maybe, just maybe, the system can then be reformed. These situations have left policyholders with no legal recourse because they have signed a policy which gives little room for them to claim the premiums they have paid for. |
|
