PRUDENTIAL SAVINGS SAGA

[Lewis.T]

seems like some pple dont understand this sentence:

ON MATURITY OF THE POLICY YOU WILL RECEIVE $42,000

Seems like you didn't update yourself on that guy's FB as well. That piece of paper there could have been fabricated by the agent himself, there are internal investigations going on.

 

[SBC]

Whau! CBT case?

 

[akwl88]

Seems like you didn't update yourself on that guy's FB as well. That piece of paper there could have been fabricated by the agent himself, there are internal investigations going on.

Agent fabricating a policy summary?

And you wonder why so many pple including me like to bash these unethical agents

 

[akwl88]

If agents can easily fabricate a policy summary, imagine the hundreds of thousands of fake policies out there

Gg max!

 

[Lewis.T]

I doubt there's that many. Don't spread fear and blow things out of proportion.

You also talk like 'bashing' them here will do any good..

 

[SBC]

Which agency?

 

[Perisher]

I'm just surprised that so many agents(including those here) and even prudential themselves can't identify a fake until now? Or is the complexity of the policies stopping them from identifying one?

I mean, how can one not recognize a fake policy from their own company?
Even professionals can't tell if a policy is fake? That's worrying.

If you show STI ETF or SSB giving out returns that are way above the norm or guaranteed something above the norm or weird wordings, one would easily identify as not possible or raise some doubt no?

But due to the complexity of a insurance endowment policy with riders, even the insurance company themselves had issues identifying a fake, how are we as consumers suppose to know thus?

Isn't it time, someone do something about these complex contracts?

 

[Bigoya]

I'm just surprised that so many agents(including those here) and even prudential themselves can't identify a fake until now? Or is the complexity of the policies stopping them from identifying one?

I mean, how can one not recognize a fake policy from their own company?
Even professionals can't tell if a policy is fake? That's worrying.

If you show STI ETF or SSB giving out returns that are way above the norm or guaranteed something above the norm or weird wordings, one would easily identify as not possible or raise some doubt no?

But due to the complexity of a insurance endowment policy with riders, even the insurance company themselves had issues identifying a fake, how are we as consumers suppose to know thus?

Isn't it time, someone do something about these complex contracts?

Try asking a 20yo working in SBS/SMRT if they had any idea what this is.

 

[soneat]

That's why when a policyholder buys a policy, he should understand what makes up the contract and understand the various T&Cs in the contract.

The above looks like a loose sheet of paper. Usually only the stuffs that's legal binding will get bounded into a book - Policy Schedule, Policy Wording, Application Form/Declaration, Endorsement. Some companies consider official letters signed by authorized officer as part of the contract, some do not.

From the above picture, looks like it is a loose sheet of paper and there's some possibility that its not an official letter by the company.

 

[akwl88]

I doubt there's that many. Don't spread fear and blow things out of proportion.

You also talk like 'bashing' them here will do any good..

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...ail-for-cheating-businessman-to-buy-fake-us5m

Fake policies are real even today

The things that agents do for money...

Scary!

 

[Shion]

Seems like you didn't update yourself on that guy's FB as well. That piece of paper there could have been fabricated by the agent himself, there are internal investigations going on.

very serious now

 

[maruikun]

I'm just surprised that so many agents(including those here) and even prudential themselves can't identify a fake until now? Or is the complexity of the policies stopping them from identifying one?

The policy submitted to the company is real but the letter to the client is not. Apparently this is an unethical issue. In my opinion if this agent can fake letter to one client, there is a very high possibility he would have done the same to his other clients. And if this client managed to claim the full amount back successfully as per policy, this means that the rest of the clients who fall prey to this agent can do the same and the company would have to honour their claims also.

It took 20 years for this matter to surface and during that period other agents could have followed the path of this unethical agent so the overall impact may be greater. I believe right now the company is doing their due diligence and seeking legal advice as well as reviewing to see if they can control and reduce the damage done.

This matter serves as a reminder for consumers to understand the policies they are buying and not just listen to what an agent says and sign blindly on the documents. There are just too many agents with hidden agenda.

 

[Mecisteus]

I'm just surprised that so many agents(including those here) and even prudential themselves can't identify a fake until now? Or is the complexity of the policies stopping them from identifying one?

I mean, how can one not recognize a fake policy from their own company?
Even professionals can't tell if a policy is fake? That's worrying.

If you show STI ETF or SSB giving out returns that are way above the norm or guaranteed something above the norm or weird wordings, one would easily identify as not possible or raise some doubt no?

But due to the complexity of a insurance endowment policy with riders, even the insurance company themselves had issues identifying a fake, how are we as consumers suppose to know thus?

Isn't it time, someone do something about these complex contracts?

It shows the agents here lack of experience.

To me, I thought the non-guaranteed and guaranteed concepts were not introduced at time of inception of this policy.

 

[Lewis.T]

It shows the agents here lack of experience.

To me, I thought the non-guaranteed and guaranteed concepts were not introduced at time of inception of this policy.

Are they not?

http://imgur.com/a/J2gXo (Photo courtesy of this post https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10154952812210255&id=634445254&hc_location=ufi)

Anyway Perisher I think it is unreasonable for you to say that we cannot recognize that policy.

Wrongful use of company letterhead meant to deceive is meant to do just that. Deceive.

Most will not be familiar of policies originating 20+ years ago, and have no idea how it is structured or how the letters were sent. The original poster withholding important information until asked didn't help the case as well. If he had shown more info earlier maybe we could have realised that the figures do not tally.

At any case I believe investigations are still ongoing, if the letter in question was indeed legit then we will have to see what Pru says about it, and the reconciliation given.

I don't understand the need for berating current agents for what a possibly 'unethical' agent did in the past, or lambaste them for not knowing older policies and letter structure.

 

[akwl88]

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapo...ail-for-cheating-businessman-to-buy-fake-us5m

Fake policies are real even today

The things that agents do for money...

Scary!

up for lewis gor gor on why agents will be bashed over and over again, then and now

 

[Mecisteus]

Are they not?

http://imgur.com/a/J2gXo (Photo courtesy of this post https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10154952812210255&id=634445254&hc_location=ufi)

I was referring to the part that says:

on maturity of the policy you will receive $42,000.

 

[Steyr69]

Next time buy from agent must get his or her ic....something happened down the road......can go his or her home argue.

Sent from Asus ME173X using GAGT

 

[Lewis.T]

up for lewis gor gor on why agents will be bashed over and over again, then and now

You never bash banks? Their employees sold high notes 5 and pinnacle notes? You never bash the common thief on the street? You got a vendetta?

You bash here got use? The people who conjured up fake supporting documents probably don't read stuff here. You aim to detract from the discussion and troll every thread to go to? PCW +1?

 

[akwl88]

You never bash banks? Their employees sold high notes 5 and pinnacle notes? You never bash the common thief on the street? You got a vendetta?

You bash here got use? The people who conjured up fake supporting documents probably don't read stuff here. You aim to detract from the discussion and troll every thread to go to? PCW +1?

i come here here bash unethical agents and spread awareness

dont try detract from the fact that insurance agents are scamming people

 

[Lewis.T]

i come here here bash unethical agents and spread awareness

dont try detract from the fact that insurance agents are scamming people

You want to be sued for slander or something?

Your fear mongering tactics are not taken well by people who do not do their own research. If they cancel policies that are beneficial for them just because they 'bought it from an agent' will you be held accountable?

Quote first