LIC Jeevan Saral: Moneylife Foundation Files Petition in Supreme Court Seeking Refund of Premiums for Policyholders
A public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Moneylife Foundation was heard by the Supreme Court on Thursday. The bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Deepak Gupta deferred the matter to 15 July 2019 as per request from senior counsel Arvind Datar, representing Moneylife Foundation.
 
The PIL filed on behalf of thousands policyholders of Jeevan Saral, seeks to have Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) and Insurance Regulatory Development Authority (IRDA) to "amend to Jeevan Saral Plan 165 policy maturity to repay all the premium paid along with bank saving rate at 8% per annum to all the existing Policy holders of the Jeevan Saral Policy."
 
The petition also seeks recall of LIC Jeevan Saral by IRDAI. 
 
As highlighted by Moneylife, LIC's Jeevan Saral, which used to be a hot-selling insurance product for agents, until it was withdrawn, is a controversial product. In fact, Jeevan Saral was a traditional product that could make your premium (money paid) disappear! This can happen in many policies during surrender or making it ‘paid-up’, but, in the case of Jeevan Saral, it has happened even at policy maturity. 
 
A senior citizen couple got just one-third of the premiums paid over the years. 
 
The Jeevan Saral product, which has gobbled up hard-earned savings of policyholders (especially senior citizens) have also agitated LIC agents and their association. Despite innumerable letters, protests and objections, LIC has not budged so far. 
 
Moneylife Foundation sent a memorandum to IRDAI on 18 August 2018, pointing out that Jeevan Saral (with profit), a traditional policy, has caused senior citizens to lose as much as 65% to 70% loss of the money invested over 10 years. 
 
From the Memorandum, IRDAI, highlighted four points in its letter to LIC and termed them as being of a 'serious nature'. These are:
 
1. The proposal form did not have any provision to mention the (lower) maturity sum assured; instead it had a provision only for the higher death benefit.
 
2. The maturity benefit was not printed on even the policy documents.
 
3. The agents, as well as some LIC officers were not aware of the plan in general, and the fact that customers may get lesser money than the total premium paid.
 
4. The prospective customers were not informed at the time of sale that the higher insurance coverage provided by the product would lead to poor (negative for those in the higher age group) returns. 
 
Moneylife Foundation also sent copies of the Memorandum to the Finance Minister as well as the insurance regulator. The financial services department in the ministry, which looks after insurance matters, on 28 September 2018, forwarded the Memorandum to IRDAI asking its chairman to take appropriate action. 
 
It has also asked IRDAI to inform the ministry about action taken (on the Memorandum) with regard to the Jeevan Saral policy and inform both, Moneylife Foundation and the ministry. 
 
Moneylife Foundation has received a one-line reply to its memorandum from the LIC chairman VK Sharma, which says, "We appreciate the concerns raised by you in your letter dated 1 October 2018. It will be dutifully looked into."
 
However, there is no further response from either LIC or the insurance regulator, which forced Moneylife Foundation to approach the highest court seeking justice for crores of policyholders.
 
You may also want to read…
 
 
 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

Sanjay Buche

7 hours ago

*Breaking*: The Supreme Court today dismissed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition filed by Moneylife Foundation seeking scrapping of LIC Jeevan Saral Policy.

*Read more at* http://bit.ly/30vEfM8

Manjiv Sharma

7 days ago

LET THE COURT TAKE THE CALL IN COMMON INTEREST OF ALL.

BUT JEEVAN SARAL IS A GREAT PLAN.

ITS A PURE TERM & ENDOWMENT COMBINATION.

SO, UNLIKE TERM PLAN
IT DOES RETURN OF AN AMOUNT.

WHICH IN CASE OF TERM PLAN IS LOST ( LOSS A CONSEPTION, NOT A FACT).

PL ASK WIDOWS WHO RECEIVED THE 250 TIMES CLAIM
( BIGGER THAN ANY TRADITIONAL ENDOWMENT, IN SAME PREMIUM ,TERM).

I FEEL IN COURT LIC WILL WIN. ON PRODUCT GROUND.

AS PRODUCT IS PASSES BY IRDA AFTER DUE SCRUTINITY.

NO FLAW IN PRODUCT TERM & CONDITION.

FOR EXAMPLE:

TAKE SAME PREMIUM & TERM & COMPARE IT WITH OTHER ENDOWMENT PLANS OF ALL LIC & PRIVATE INSURANCE CO.

PARAMETERS AS:

1.PREMIUM :SAME
2.TERM:SAME

3. RISK COVER= SARAL IS. BETTER
4. MATURITY= SARAL IS BETTER.

AS LA DEPENDS UPON MORTALITY & INVESTMENT RETURNS.

LONG TERM WAS BETTER.


BUT

AS ON DATE NOW:
SARAL PLAN IS CLOSED FOR NEW SALE.

THE EFFECT ON MORTALITY WILL BE ADVERSE.

AS IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE AN OPEN ENDED PRODUCT.
IN EASY TERM: WITH NEW LA ENTERENCE THE AGERAGE AGE REMAIN CONSTANT ( PROBABILITY) BUT NOW THE AVG AGE OF POLICY HOLDER WILL RISE. RESULTING INTO MORE CALIM.

EVENTUALLY: ITS BETTER TEN A TERM PLAN WHERE .NO RETURNS ON MATURITY.


ANYWAYS:
ITS IN FAVOUR OF POLICY HOLDER.

MU JUDJMENT:
THOSE WHO GOT THE CLAIM,

FLEXIBILITY IN WITHDRAWL

INTEREST OF 7% ON LAPSES .

POLICY(BROKEN PERIOD).

250 TIMES THE RISK COVER.

PARTIAL WITHDRAWL

SAME PREMIUM FOR ALL AGE.


TERM + ENDOWMENT COMBINATION

ITS WAS A GREAT MIX OF NEED & WANTS.
COURT IS THE BEST PLACE, WE ALL WILL RESPECT & ABIDE BY ITS GOOD DECISION.

NOTHING WRONG IN GOING TO COURT OF LAW. IF CASE OF ANY DOUBT.

GOOD INITIATIVE
NICE JOB.

BEST WILL PREVAIL.














REPLY

Sanjay Buche

In Reply to Manjiv Sharma 4 days ago

Nicely explained.
Most of the people are commented without the knowledge of this product,and the besic concept of life insurance as well.
Half knowledge is dengerous.

Amit Kumar

In Reply to Sanjay Buche 4 days ago

You are absolutely right, most people are commenting without the knowledge of the product. But tell me who is responsible to share the details of the product?? Is it the customer's who should know the details on their own or that agent should tell the details in detailed manner to a customer before selling any product. The agents have only misguided the customers on behalf of LIC and LIC should accept its fault.

MDT

In Reply to Sanjay Buche 4 days ago

Thanks for your comment. Are you the same Sanjay Buche, who is shown as ABM at Life Insurance Corporation of India? (https://in.linkedin.com/in/sanjay-buche-52585791?trk=public_profile_samename_mini-profile_title) Have you ever thought about policyholders, especially from your own family or friend circle who would have lost money due to hyped selling by LIC?

MDT

In Reply to Manjiv Sharma 7 days ago

Thanks for your comment. Are you the same Manjiv Sharma, who is shown on LinkedIn (https://in.linkedin.com/in/manjiv-sharma-71a80819) as development officer of LIC? In that case, we request you to think for a second about your agents and their clients, especially those above 50 years, who have lost money in this scheme. Also a normal comment is fine with us and our other readers, instead of using all capital letters.

Amit Kumar

In Reply to Manjiv Sharma 7 days ago

Dear Sir,

What you said is totally true. But one thing is also true that the mentioned plan was not sold as term plan. Nobody knew its more of a term plan and less of a traditional plan. And while selling also returns were discussed instead of cover as regarding to term plans.

Regards

Sanjay Buche

1 week ago

Jeevan saral is a very nicely designed insurance plan.
Thanks to LIC for this inovative product.
Main concern is not understanding of this product.
Basically Insurance policies are for Insurance cover.and not for higher returns.
In term insurance policies nothing will be payable at maturity,This does not mean that Term insurance is bad for return.
Can anybody file a case for no returns in term policies.
Risk premium increases with age and death sum assured.
Higher the age higher will be the risk premium.
If any body opts for insurance at higher age ,naturally the premium amount towards risk will be higher.
Jeevan saral plan of LIC is very nicely designed innovative product and was awarded at various platform.
It is absolutely wrong to say about this plan.
Please understand the product first and then comment.
This plan gives good return as compared to other product, for lower age at entry . Returns will be less for Higher age at entry.
It is quite obvious that higher the age higher will be the probability of risk of being died.
In Many policies of Jeevan saral LIC settled the death claim.

REPLY

Prashant Doshi

In Reply to Sanjay Buche 1 week ago

Very shameful blind sale by a trustworthy corporation in India due to the poor knowledge of the team heads for the agents..

Prashant Doshi

In Reply to Sanjay Buche 1 week ago

This product was sold in the market without mentioning it's side effects ...Because of the poor study by the sellers and their Superior officers only interested in new business more and more

Rishabh Adukia

1 week ago

Extremely sad state of affairs by LiC and ministry , nobody is taking accountability
A policy holder must be given an option to surrender and take money back along with Interest
Request others to join in this mission

Lalit Khurana

1 week ago

I was holding this Jeevan saral policy from last 6 years and have just surrendered this a month back only and have not even got what all I have paid in the last 6 years....Can I also file any complaint regarding this ? Please confirm

REPLY

Sucheta Dalal

In Reply to Lalit Khurana 1 week ago

You can join out complaint by filing an affidavit - write to [email protected] and we will send you a draft that you have to fill and send back. It is in your interest to do so, especially since there will be no cost to you.

Prashant Doshi

In Reply to Sucheta Dalal 1 week ago

The proposal review slip-on the policy docket don't contain the amt of Maturity SA within mentioned even in the written decision by officers and the definition of The word Maturity SA is mentioned nowhere

Prashant Doshi

In Reply to Prashant Doshi 1 week ago

No morality charges are ever mentioned using any table in the policy document

Amit Kumar

1 week ago

I also own a policy of Jeevan saral and continuing since 2013. While selling the LIC agent showed a chart containing returns starting from 10 years to 35years and said the returns are good. Which worked as a catalyst for me to invest in such a policy. Now I'm reading all these about the policy. Kindly guide me what to be done as of now.

REPLY

Prashant Doshi

In Reply to Amit Kumar 1 week ago

Age below 45 yrs at the inception of the policy need not worry about returns

Anil Kumar

1 week ago

What is the number of policy affected / premium amounts gobbled up by LIC in this. An article headlining this will probably wake more people up / get regulatory and finance ministry cranking.

REPLY

Sucheta Dalal

In Reply to Anil Kumar 1 week ago

We are in the Supreme Court because no amount of writing, cover stories, RTI and memorandums worked. It is a long process. You may want to read these two articles of 2017 and 2018 to know the hard work that has gone behind the litigation.
2017: https://www.moneylife.in/article/life-insurance-lic-jeevan-saral-a-toxic-product/50333.html
2018: https://www.moneylife.in/article/will-lic-be-made-to-pay-for-the-horrible-mis-selling-of-jeevan-saral/53802.html

google within our site and you will find more!

Panch Deo Pandey

1 week ago

I support money life foundation, thank you for supporting us. I believe, we will get a justice.

Panch Deo Pandey

1 week ago

As a L I C agent I have sold this policy to many people almost my relatives and I also buy this policy. This is very hazardous for us.

REPLY

Prashant Doshi

In Reply to Panch Deo Pandey 1 week ago

Wait and watch...the mass fraud shall be opened at SC

Sucheta Dalal

In Reply to Panch Deo Pandey 1 week ago

Mr Pandey, do write to [email protected] so that those who have this policy can join the petition free of charge. WE are sending affidavits for them to send to their clients. This needs to be done before 10 July since case comes up on 15th July. You can also call 49205000 and speak to Mr Yogesh Sapkale today. We are sending out draft affidavits today

Bhushan Dhingra

1 week ago

Please update me as well as I have also invested in this policy and I am hardly getting anything back. Kindly update how and where to register a complaint against this.

SANDESH PAWAR

1 week ago

Although I don't own the policy, I would like to give big "Thank you" on behalf of the policy holders. I am proud to be associated with an organisation like yours.

Vikas Gupta

2 weeks ago

Gr8...

Harish

2 weeks ago

Great Work MoneyLife!

Pradip Chinnakonda

2 weeks ago

Please update.

Consumer Forum Asks Oriental Insurance to pay Rs7.38 lakh for Joyride Injury
A personal accident policy and a happy family floater policy are usually sufficient for most individuals and families to head out for a holiday. Or that’s what a honeymooner thought. 
 
The following is a case of a person holding all relevant policies but different interpretation of certain clauses by the insurer could have denied him reimbursement. Maintaining all relevant receipts, bills and records probably too came in handy for the insured. 
 
For Hiren B Joshi, a resident of Mira Road, the holiday was also his honeymoon within a fortnight of his marriage on 28 November 2014. He selected Manali in Himachal Pradesh after consulting Heena Tours & Travels. Lakhs of people visit Manali each year for adventure sports including paragliding from India and abroad, newspaper reports say. {https://www.thrillophilia.com/cities/manali/tags/paragliding}
 
The Joshis were part of a group of 100, in which they would go up in the air through a non-motorized, foot launched flying glider with an inflatable wing, which would gradually descend with the help of a parachute. In the case of Mr Joshi, the parachute did not open fully, despite attempts by the pilot. On descent he hit the rocky portion of the surrounding hills and was grievously injured, says a South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum order dated 1 June 2019. 
 
The paragliding, on 10 December 2014, was being operated by an expert and Mr Joshi had no role in operating it and was no more than what a passenger would be in an airplane.
 
For his injuries, Mr Joshi was admitted the same day to Lady Wellingdon Hospital at Kullu. He was moved to Fortis Hospital at Mohali the next day and was discharged on 6 January 2015. Soon after reaching Mumbai, he was hospitalized again at the Borivali Orthopaedic Clinic from 6 February 2015 to 9 February 2015 and again from 1 April 2015 to 4 April 2015. 
 
“The complainant lodged the claim claiming compensation of Rs6 lakh under the happy floater policy and in support of it he had submitted a duly completed claim form and the original medical and investigation reports, case papers, bills, memos, which was received by the opposite party on 12 January 2015,” said the order by the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum. 
 
Happy family floater policy from Oriental Insurance gives a fairly comprehensive cover to a family against illness and injury. For details on Happy Family Floater Policy, please read under -- {https://orientalinsurance.org.in/documents/10182/45621/HFF_Policy_wording/6ad2772c-5efc-4cc9-a46a-b2def73f9493
 
Mr Joshi also filed a claim under the personal accident policy issued to him by the insurance company. 
 
Mr Joshi sought Rs6 lakh plus Rs1.28 lakh for the settlement of his claims under the happy family floater policy and personal accident policy and compensation. He also asked the insurance company to pay him Rs60,000 towards payment of fees to a senior advocate.
 
He submitted every single piece of document that could be relevant for the case including brochures given by the travel operator, medical and hospitalisation bills, communications with Raksha TPA, among others.
 
The insurance company rejected his claims on 25 March 2015 and the order was confirmed by the ombudsman on 26 October 2015. One of the key grounds for rejection of his claims by the insurer was Clause 4.19 of the policy.
 
Clause 4.19 of Oriental Insurance Co states “Any treatment arising from Insured’s participation in any hazardous activity including but not limited to scuba diving, motor racing, parachuting, hang gliding, rock or mountain climbing etc. unless specifically agreed by the Insurance Company.”
 
However, Joshi contended that he himself did not indulge in any risky activities, he was not operating any equipment and was just like a passenger being navigated by a trained pilot. 
 
At the Consumer Forum, the insurance company “appeared and filed a written statement through their authorised signatories and the divisional manager Jaysurya Rapaka ,stating that, the complaint is false and bad in law, reliefs prayed for are not maintainable and there is no cause for action and the complaint is time barred, hence dismissed with cost.”
 
“…taking part in paragliding is itself risk, knowing the same complainant has taken the risk and hence the injury cause due to taking such risk is not covered,” the insurer contended.  
 
The insurer could not provide any material evidence to back up the contention that paragliding is a hazardous activity, and that injuries were sustained because of Joshi’s own negligence, Joshi contended. 
 
Mr Joshi’s request to Raksha TPA for cashless facility on 12 December 2014 too had come a cropper, with Raksha replying that as per clause 4.19 the injury has been sustained during a hazardous sport. Raksha assured Joshi that he could seek a review later.
 
The bench finally decided that Joshi is entitled to Rs6 lakh under happy family floater policy, Rs1.28 lakh under personal accident policy, along with 3% interest from the date of filing the complaint. Mr Joshi also got Rs7,000 as compensation for mental agony and Rs3,000 for the proceedings. 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

P M Ravindran

4 weeks ago

The relevant question is whether the insurance co has paid the compensation or gone on appeal.

shivkumar

4 weeks ago

Insurance companies are very fast while issuing a policy, on the other hand they look for all sorts of excuses to reject the claims. I will not be surprised that the insurance company in the said case goes in appeal before the State Commission. By the way what is 3% interest? Is it a joke?

Personal Finance   Sponsored Post
“Why You Should Always Purchase US-based Visitors Insurance When Traveling to the USA” By Rajeev Shrivastava, CEO and Founder, VisitorsCoverage
The number of Indians traveling to the United States is expected to hit 1.19 million this year and grow to an estimated 1.41 million by 2022. Many of you reading this may have heard stories of family and friends who have traveled to America without visitors insurance and ended up with huge medical bills, or worse, financial insolvency. America does not have a universal medical system and it is well-known that it has some of the highest medical costs in the world. Traveling for business or personal reasons without adequate visitors travel insurance is a risk not worth taking for yourself and your family.
 
How do I know if I need visitors insurance? 
 
Visitors insurance is always recommended for international travel, but especially for travel to the United States. While the US does not require travel medical insurance for entry, many other countries do. Some countries and regions, like Cuba and the Schengen region of Europe, require certain citizens to have a visitors insurance policy to gain entry. In the Schengen countries, at least 30,000€ of medical travel insurance coverage is required to obtain the Schengen visa. While this may be adequate coverage for a minor illness or injury in the EU, it would be woefully inadequate for any hospital visit or stay in the United States. 
 
When traveling to the United States, you always want to purchase your travel insurance from a US-based travel insurance provider so that you can have numerous policy options and pricing to choose from. 
 
Don’t think that you will be a “lucky” traveler and be safe from having a medical mishap 
 
Travelers have been known to injure themselves while traveling to the airport or while at the airport waiting for their flight. Injuries have occurred while disembarking from tour buses or cruise ships, but most injuries that happen abroad are no different than injuries or illnesses that could happen at home – but you won’t be at home, and if in the United States you would be looking at a minimum of 105,000 INR (1,500 USD) just to be admitted to an emergency room. 
 
What kind of travel insurance coverage do I need to have when traveling to America? 
 
The most important travel coverage you will need when traveling to the United States is medical coverage. It is recommended to have up to $2 million USD in coverage when traveling to the United States. If you can afford more, purchase more—it is not uncommon to accrue $2 million USD if a serious illness or injury requires hospitalization and surgery in the US. 
 
Travelers need to think about flight cancellations, emergency evacuation for both medical and global incidents such as California earthquakes, Florida hurricanes and Midwest tornadoes when visiting the United States. 
 
In addition to medical mishaps, foreign visitors could potentially be denied border entry, have their luggage or passports lost or stolen and need to consider being covered for emergency evacuation and emergency reunion with a family member in the US if they fall seriously ill or seriously injured. Repatriation back to your home country in the case of serious injury or illness or repatriation of your remains is sobering, but a necessary coverage option to consider, as is “Cancel for Any Reason” coverage which is the only coverage that will repay a portion of your prepaid expenses due to civil unrest.
 
How does trip insurance differ from travel insurance?
 
“Travel insurance” is often used interchangeably with “trip insurance” which is protection for a travelers’ financial investment made for a trip. Travel medical insurance provides different benefits than trip or travel insurance. Trip insurance generally does not provide medical coverage, but rather coverage for trip-related mishaps, such as flight and trip cancelations or interruptions. All airlines offer trip insurance to their customers before paying for their flight, typically with only one provider offered, and many travelers will click this option, not realizing that there are many more options for purchasing trip insurance with more comprehensive coverage. 
 
Trip insurance would cover the aforementioned scenarios including loss of passports and luggage, border entry denial and Cancel for Any Reason coverage, which allows cancellation of your travel up to two days prior to departure due to family illness or death, work reasons, a natural disaster or civil unrest in the city you are planning to visit. Cancel for Any Reason coverage allows you to recoup up to 75 percent of prepaid expenses should you cancel your travel plans. 
 
Benefits of purchasing a US-based visitors travel insurance policy:
 
  • While policies purchased in India are typically less expensive than US-based policies, this is usually because the coverage limits are lower and you may not have coverage for cancellation of your trip should there be an emergency such as family death or illness. 
     
  • Your medical coverage protection will be more comprehensive because they are based in the US and can negotiate fees directly with the providers without any middlemen.
     
  • Your options range from less expensive policies that have a range of deductibles to purchasing comprehensive plans within preferred provider networks (PPOs) where you may only have to pay a reasonable co-pay or pay nothing at all should you or a family member require medical treatment. 
     
  • If you need immediate assistance you may not be able to reach the Indian company due to different time zones, secondly, you will have to pay all medical or trip cancellation costs up front and file for reimbursement when you return home, which could take months.
 
Purchasing a travel insurance policy in India may seem like a good deal as your vacation costs add up, but this is one expense you can’t afford to “go cheap” with. 
 
Rajeev Shrivastava, is CEO of VisitorsCoverage Inc., an InsurTech company operating in the travel insurance space with a mission to simplify travel insurance for travelers. 
 
Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

User

COMMENTS

SURESH NAIR

4 weeks ago

The author has not given any concrete proof that the policies bought in US are way better than policies sold in India. This piece is full of insinuations and also highly misleading! Policies in India come with sum assured as high as 10 lakhs US Dollars. It is quite comprehensive and covers passport land luggage loss, flight cancellations, emergency evacuations, repatriation, family member reunion in case of emergencies etc . All the points mentioned by the author. Also to state that upfront payment is needed for policies taken in India is outright false! And another false point he makes when he states that due to different time zones you won’t be able to contact the Indian company! Customer care works 24 hours and also you can contact the service provider in US with whom the insurance company has entered into a tie up!

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

online financial advisory
Pathbreakers
Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
online financia advisory
The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
financial magazines online
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
financial magazines in india
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)