Order-15.
Date-16/10/2015.
In this complaint Complainant Rudrashish Chatterjee by filing this complaint has submitted that complainant being convinced by op nos. 1 and 2 purchased an Insurance Policy bearing No. 877619569 on 14.05.2013 and at the time of filing up the proposal form, the policy the op nos. 1 & 2 told the complainant for the premium payment term of the policy is one year and after one year the complainant could withdraw the premium amount along with interest.So, being assured by the op nos. 1 & 2, complainant invested Rs. 49,267.83 paisa for that policy but after one year, complainant visited the office of the op no.1 for surrender the policy and withdrawing the invested premium amount of Rs. 49.267.83 paisa along with interest.
At that time op informed the complainant that premium payment for the period is for 6 years and the last installment of premium due on 14.05.2018.Hearing this complainant reported this matter to op no.1 by a letter dated 25.11.2014 intimating the entire fact.Thereafter complainant received a reply from op nos. 1 & 2 vide a letter dated 28.11.2014 where ops have apologized for any wrong information conveyed to complainant.Complainant lodged a complaint against the ops with the Jt. Secretary, CAD, 11A Mirza Galib St., Kolkata -700087 on 18.12.2014 for amicably settlement and convened a tripartite meeting on 12.03.2015 but ops did not appear for which the matter was not resolved and complainant was asked to file this complaint.Practically for the deceitful manner of practice and for giving mis-selling a false representation and for the purpose of selling the Insurance Policy, practically complainant has been suffered and for which complainant has prayed for redressal.
On the other hand after service of notice upon the ops, op no.2 filed written statement stating that complaint is not maintainable because no policy was issued by the op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Parkand op no.2 does not run any Insurance business and policy was issued by op no.1.So, the complaint is not maintainable against op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park.
Op no.2 further submitted that the role of op no.2 is only for facilitator or corporate agent and the actual Insurance contract is entered into and policy was issued by the op no.1 and if the complainant has any dispute regarding the insurance policy, then he should have filed the complaint only against op no.1 not against op no.2 as because op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park did not provide any service to the complainant and contract is in between the op no.1 and complainant.But op no.2 worked as facilitator and corporate agent of op no.1.
Further it is submitted that there is a free look period of 48 days on receipt of the said policy.Complainant ought to have filed within free look period for such relief.But he did not file such application within free look period for cancellation of the said policy for making false representation etc.
Moreover there has not been any request for withdrawal of the policy during free look period.Further complainant was aware of the fact that premium was payable by 6 years from the date of effective coverage and in spite of the above and in spite of the option to cancel the policy within 15 days in case if the complainant is not satisfied with terms of the policy, the complainant had opted to continue the policy and everything was clearly explained to the complainant by the Financial Planning Consultant of op no.1 and in addition to the above, op no.1 issued the policy only after a tele verification of the prospective customers before issuance of the policy by the op no.1 and practically bank cannot be functioned with the Insurance liability on this ground, complaint is not maintainable and liable to be dismissed.
The allegation of negligence and deficiency of service are wholly misconceived, careless, false, vexatious and so complainant is not entitled to get any relief against op no.2.
On the other hand op no.1 the Insurance Company by filing written statement submitted that on 14.05.2013, complainant invested a sum of Rs. 49,999/- as the premium accepting the terms of the contract and paying the terms of the policy was for 6 years having a coverage terms of 20 years being Policy No. 877619569 by Demand Draft being No. 115232 from op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park Branch and if actually complainant was dissatisfied of the said policy, then he has his option to return original policy with a written request within 15 days that is during free look period from the date of receipt of the document on 04.05.2013.
In fact in the application form for purchasing the policy terms and conditions were there and it was clearly mentioned and complainant after reading the same signed and submitted it.So, there is no negligence and deficiency on the part of op no.1.
In fact the policy was issued after the receipt of the payment from the complainant and the said policy was not for against one payment premium.Customer himself confirmed all policy details over phone and policy is very much outside free look period so, the question of cancelling the policy and refund the complete amount could not and cannot arise.
Moreover the policy was sent to the address of the complainant as provided in the proposal form long back and the same would be the evident from the delivery proof which is also filed by the op.It is specifically mentioned that complainant deliberately and intentionally failed to pay the premium i.e. on 14.05.2014 as per terms and conditions of the policy and for which same has already been lapsed and there is no question and mislead representation for the purpose of selling the Insurance Policy and in the above circumstances, this complaint should be dismissed.
Decision with reasons
On proper consideration of the entire fact and materials and also the argument advanced by the Ld. Lawyers of both the parties and further considering the policy and Annexure-‘B’, it is found that Max Life Insurance agent office of the op no.1 is at op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park and op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park is op no.2 and agent is op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park which is also noted.
Complainant has brought the allegation against the staff of the op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park about the mis-selling of the same.Fact remains that the allegation has brought against the op no.2 and that has not been denied by the op no.2 in detail.But they have stated that they have acted as facilitator of op no.1.But from the document it is proved that they are the agent and they are running the business of op no.1 from their op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park office and they acted as corporate agent on behalf of the op no.1.Then it is clear that filling was done by the op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park op no.2 about selling and in fact in all the cases op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park who are selling Insurance Policy on behalf of other Insurance Companies are misguiding the poorer section of people and middle class people in such a fashion and it is the practice of the so called bank who are appointed as corporate agent and in this case it is proved that this op no.2 assured the complainant that it is one time premium payment policy and complainant relying upon such assurance deposited that amount because it is proved beyond any manner of doubt that complainant has no such financial capacity to deposit Rs. 50,000/- per year as premium.
Most of the private banks and private Insurance Companies have their franchise and private banks are selling Insurance policy as corporate agent of other insurance companies and they are mis-selling to the customers in so many manner and collecting such fund.No doubt Max Life Insurance Co. Ltd. already reported that policy lapsed since 14.05.2014 and it is specifically mentioned that complainant cannot surrender until 3 years of payment and if he surrendered after 3 years, then customer can get cash surrender value after 3 years.
But fact remains that complainant is entitled to get back the total deposited amount after deducting service charge and management charges and in this regard it is to be mentioned that Birla Sun Life or Max Life Insurance Ltd. or Cholomondalam and other private insurance companies have conducted their business with some other private banks like op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd., HDFC Bank, ICICI Bank, Standard Chartered Bank, Hong Kong Bank etc.All those banks and their staff are misguiding the customers and are alluring them to invest one time premium stating so for getting more commission and in such a manner thousands of people of West Bengal has been deceived by the banks who are corporate agent and even private Insurance Companies.
No doubt it is a contract in between the complainant and op no.1.But fact remains that at the time of accepting the policy, no consent form was filled up by the complainant.But as per IRDA guidelines, consent form has been submitted at first and in the said consent form, details of the policy, financial capacity of the purchaser and other queries shall be there and the purchaser shall have to note down against all the queries.After submission of that consent form, the company shall consider whether the policy form shall be supplied to the concerned person or not and in that case it is the duty of the Insurance Companies or the corporate agent that the concerned person has his financial capacity and he has realized the terms and conditions of the policy, but that consent form is not here and everything is done by the op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park who is running this business to get huge commission and fact remains that the present insurance company in all respect is depending upon the private bank like op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park because those banks also indirectly have taken the commission and deceiving the customers at large after purchasing the said policy.
Throughout West Bengal and after holding the post of President ship at Coochbehar, North 24 Parganas and in this areas we have gathered all the private insurance companies have been deceiving the public at large.In the present case practically private Insurance Companies are engaged in the market to collect one time premium and after that whether that insurance amount is deposited against subsequent premium or not, that is not their headache because it is their practice to collect such premium amount without thinking over the future of the customers, the depositors because they are only for purpose for creating their capital and so they are issuing policy as per information of the corporate agent who are collecting the same from other classes and ultimately they are deceiving the people at large and in the present case, op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park as corporate agent deceived the complainant no doubt and if the corporate agent and agent are not in the field, in that case, all the private insurance companies in India shall be closed.
So, they have deputed such cheat agents who are loitering through bank or in the field and they have already honoured as cheat agent and corporate agent for selling such sort of policy stating that one time premium amount is sufficient.But ultimately without giving the insured a chance about the fact of the policy, the condition of the policy etc. and in this case it is proved that the entire form was filled up by the op no.2 Axis Bank Ltd. Gol Park employees only signatures were collected of the complainant.Truth is that complainant was deceived by the ops.
In reality there is no contract in between the complainant and op because it is reported by the op subsequently when complainant prayed for refund of the premium amount for cancellation the same policy, they reported that the said policy already lapsed, but before that no information was given to the complainant that complainant shall have to pay further premium and that is common practice of the private insurance companies.In fact it is impossible for the insured to know about the terms and conditions of the policy and in the present case, it is proved that it is no doubt a mis-sold which was done by the op no.2 for which ops are silent about that.
Fact remains that op nos. 1 & 2 never reported to the complainant that further premium is required to be paid.But only first letter was received by the complainant when complainant prayed for cancellation and refund of the amount and that letter was issued by the Max Life Insurance Co. Ltd. only on 28.11.2014, whereas complainant’s present policy was effective from 14.05.2013 and proposal form was submitted by the op no.2 on 14.05.2013.
So, considering all the above fact and circumstances and also the IRDA guideline for refund of the lapsed premium after deducting service charges, management charges etc. we are convinced to hold that op no.1 has acted illegally and op no.1 is bound to refund the entire amount after deducting service charge for one year and truth is that a sum of Rs. 49,999/- was deposited as premium out of that after deducting Rs. 1,999/- and the balance Rs. 48,000/- shall be paid by the op no.1 to the complainant.On the ground that op no.1 through their corporate agent op no.2 mis-sold the said policy and mis-selling is caused sufferance, pain, mental agony and financial loss for which op nos. 1 & 2 shall have to pay Rs. 2,000/- as compensation each to the complainant.
Practically as per IRDA guide line 2014 op no.1 can easily refund the said amount after deducting such service charges, management charges but that has not been done because it is their business to invest money in the market after enjoying such deposited amount.Nowadays in private insurance companies deposited account is more than that of the monthly total deposited premium by the other customers.But anyhow Forum is sleeping and has not given any proper protection to the ill-fated customers that is consumers and most of the Fora have taken a technical view and casual view for which the people at large in West Bengal and all over India are being deceived.Though C.P. Act 1986 is here and there but their implementation is found painful in the cold chamber of the Fora.It is not the expression of the Fora but it is the observation of the 2 or 3 noble Laureates.European Consumer Commission has already taken a step in this regard and fact remains that the rules and regulations of the IRDA must be followed.But it is not being followed.
Most interesting factor is that IRDA has also become a defunct organization now.Practically they are not acting legally and they have also appointed some agents and those agents are working in favour of the insurance companies.There is a philosophical thought with regard to C.P. Act that without consumer thinking and thought, a Forum cannot protect the interest of the consumers.Probably in India and particularly in West Bengal Consumer Revolution can only produce a parallel revolution in thought of the Forum and can reshape the thinking of the Forum and without knowledge of consumer philosophy, justice and rights cannot be given to the consumers.But it is no doubt a painful situation all over India and particularly in West Bengal.
There is no incident in West Bengal that Forum has taken any positive step against in Insurance Company, Banking Authority or passed any direction by judgement to follow the same.But casual judgement is being passed and same are being modified and sometimes set aside and same have confirmed by Fora but that is not the concept of C.P. Act 1986.In fact Fora must be interested in reading the consumer philosophy, consumer thinking and thought and the purpose of social organization to protect the interest of the consumers and we have gathered that if Forum is found not active, consumers shall be thrown on the street and that is the present situation.
After considering the alarming situation of the consumers in West Bengal and after handling such sort of cases including other cases, we are confirmed that mis-selling of policy is at random by the private insurance companies through corporate agent and other agents and in fact private insurance company has been deceiving the public at large.But there is no action on the part of the Fora.
In view of the above findings and materials we are convinced that the deficiency and negligence on the part of the op is well proved and op has no intention to refund the premium amount which is lapsed.Practically due to mis-sale of the same, this op has failed to produce any document to show that at any point of time prior to receipt of the cancellation letter made by the complainant about accepting the policy or etc. and it is the common feature in running the business by the private insurance company like op.
Considering the above fact and also considering the policy, it is found that complainant deposited Rs.49,999/- not any lower figure of amount and in the meantime more than one year lapsed policy is shown as lapsed.So, it is the legal duty as per IRDA guideline 2014 to refund the amount after deduction of the service charges, but that has not been done and it is no doubt proved unfair trade practice on the part of the op nos.1 and 2 has acted illegally and mis-sale the same for the purpose for growing their commission amount.
In view of the above position and also considering the entire findings, complainant is entitled to get a decree as prayed for and for which op shall have to refund Rs. 48,000/- out of deposited receipt of Rs. 49,999/- after deducting Rs. 1,999/- as service charges and management charges and further for adopting unfair trade practice and mis-selling by the ops’ agent, op nos. 1 & 2 shall have to pay Rs. 2,000/- each to the complainant as compensation and further for proceeding with the case and to spend huge money for conducting the case, complainant is entitled to get Rs. 2,000/- as litigation cost from op nos. 1 & 2.
Thus the complaint succeeds.
Hence, it is
ORDERED
That the complaint be and the same is allowed on contest with cost of Rs. 2,000/- each.
Op no.1 is directed to refund Rs. 48,000/- out of total deposited amount of Rs. 49,999/- because balance Rs. 1,999/- is deducted as service charges and management charges by op no.1.
Ops shall have to pay compensation for harassment and for deceitful manner of trade i.e. a sum of Rs. 2,000/- each as compensation to the complainant and the entire amount i.e. litigation cost, compensation and the refund amount of one time premium of Rs. 48,000/- must be paid within one month from the date of this order to the complainant failing which after expiry of one month from the date of this order, penal interest at the rate of Rs. 200/- shall be assessed and if it is collected, it shall be deposited to this Forum’s account.
Even if it is found that ops are reluctant to comply this order, in that case penal action u/s 25 read with 27 of C.P. Act 1986 shall be started against them for which further penalty and fine shall be imposed upon them.
