What about these #%&!$%$* insurance companies?
- Thread starter JLM
- Start date
Here's a more detailed article.
http://ca.news.yahoo.com/huge-medical-bill-rejected-travel-insurance-company-120000753.html
I don't think there's much debate at all. They did not fill in the application correctly. Most likely it was unintentional on their part but, if that is indeed the wording on the application, then it's pretty clear if she received perscriptions then she had "been prescribed" the medication.
That account is much more detailed than I heard on the radio, but pretty sleazy treatment. Sometimes doctors only reason giving a prescription is save another visit to the doctor, hence saving money in the long run. On two or three occasions my doctor has said to me, "I'm pretty sure what you have is so and so and it should clear up in x days, if it doesn't get the prescription filled". This is particularly reprehensible as she was already cleared for treatment.
Well there never is in a news article but since when has that ever stopped anyone here? Lol.
Gotta talk about something.
Then you are talking about something that isn't even prevalent.
An insurance cannot 'revoke' your coverage for a 'minor' error on your claims application. If they do, then they've made a mistake or you simply have to fix the error on your application.
Ah, just read the article (finally).
Yes this one will be a problem because of the exposure and whether or not it was misrepresentation on the policyholder's behalf. There should be a cap on medical costs regardless - I have a hard time believing anyone would be insured for over $100,000 in medical fees.
Last edited:
I was talking about a claims application.
This is about a policy application.
Okay I checked out AMA's coverage.
The limit is $5 million, so I think the insurance company needs to prove intentional misrepresentation if they want to make a case.
https://www.orioninsurance.ca/AMA/Documents/Tranquility-Policy-Document.pdf
If it goes to court the Insurance company will have to prove intentional misrepresentation of a nature that would have an effect for what she is claiming. If she is claiming she got cancer but has a prescription for cancer drugs then she will be denied. If she got cancer and all her medications are for migraines and heartburn she will most likely win.
This is a simple case of 'deny, deny, deny' which is a game the insurance industry likes to play where they deny almost all claims at first and then keep denying them hoping the client will get frustrated and give up rather than spend big bucks on a lawyer to fight for a few hundred or couple of thousand bucks. Most of the time their game works, occasionally they have to give a settlement.
I notice that they deemed the insurance inappropriate and refunded her her $959. I wonder if she never made a claim whether they would have reviewed the claim and issued her a refund.
That is the slimiest part of this tactic.
They happily accept people's money, and then look into these things only when the person makes a claim.
How many other people have paid them for insurance they never actually had?
This was not the result of reviewing a claim, this was a review of her qualifications for the plan itself.
Accepting the person's money should imply some level of approval on the part of the insurance company.
This is an entirely self serving method, since they save money on actually reviewing policies when people apply for them, they get to accept money from everyone regardless of if they are actually qualified for the plan, and then when people actually need to make a claim they get to get out of paying a decent chunk of them.
Before getting the "Canadian healthcare sucks" bug up the *** it might be best to contact Medical Tourism Association - Medical travel & health tourism to get hints on the right insurance.
Ya think?
I do and in doing so looked at my blue cross. No problem if it's an emergency but limited when non life threatening and treatable upon return home.
I do and in doing so looked at my blue cross. No problem if it's an emergency but limited when non life threatening and treatable upon return home.
That little practice is actually nothing new by any means. Years ago there was an infamous auto insurance company where anyone could get auto insurance coverage and when applying you could give them any information or misinformation you wanted to and quite often it would go on year after year with no repercussions UNTIL one day when making a claim and you were informed you had no claim because you were lying. "Honesty is the best policy".