THE EDITOR, Sir:
KINDLY ALLOW me space in your newspaper to express my disgust with one of the life insurance companies in New Kingston.
I took out an endowment
policy with a representative from this insurance company 25 years ago. At the end of the policy life (maturity), the sum assured should be paid over to me, plus dividends and interest accrued over the years, less any indebtedness.
On February 2, 2005, I went to the insurance company to surrender this policy, only to discover that 25 years ago, the agent's representations were false, as the policy that I was sold was not an endowment policy but a 'whole life' policy paid up after 25 years.
Therefore, in surrendering this policy, I am only entitled to the cash value or face value of the policy and not the assured sum.
The fact that I had taken out similar policies, for my children, in which I had received the assured sum when they have attained the set age (21 years old) highlighted my intention in quest of future investment, and could not be seen as a
mistake on my part.
The question that needs to be asked: Does life insurance
policy sale fall under the Sale of Goods Act maxim 'Let the buyer beware' or is insurance policy sale under a 'principal and client' fiduciary relationship.
Who protects the poor and the uneducated who fail to read these documents that are
usually written in 'fine' print?
Who is responsible for agent misrepresentations in their conduct in making policy sales, whose only aim is to make super commissions for their own personal gain?
Where is the morality and ethics in this profession? What recourse is open to the unsuspecting customers who suffer at the hands of these
unprofessional sales personnel?
I am, etc.,
GLENROY WILLIAMS
Kingston
