Insurance Tips

Back to Tips Index | Know Your Rights #1

Case 1
M.T. the owner of a taxi-cab had his car stolen in 1998. The insurance company (Maoz Insurance) refused to pay, on the basis that the necessary protections had not been installed. Up to this point, all sides agree.

However, one of the clauses of the insurance Law in Israel states that all car protection requirements must be highlighted in the insurance policy in such a way that a normal person would definitely not miss it (the law suggests different letters or different colors). On the actual Maoz policy, these requirements were underlined with a dotted line only.

M.T. agreed that his car needed a basic alarm system. However, he claimed that he was not made aware that it also needed the much more expensive Bitchonit system as well.

The court accepted his argument and ordered Maoz to pay the claim in full.

Moral:
It is not only what is written but also how it is written.

 

Case2:
Mr. A.K. was sold a Clal medical insurance policy. He suffered a heart attack and underwent heart bypass surgery. Clal refused the claim, stating that heart conditions were not covered under this specific policy. A.K. claimed that

  1. firstly, he never received a copy of the policy.
    part of the initial medical test included an ECG test which would seem to imply that heart conditions do apply.
  2. his insurance agent assured him that all major medical problems were covered.

The court decided that A.K. had been misled and furthermore, that any policy covering "major medical" problems must by definition also cover heart conditions.

A.K. was awarded 250,000 NIS + 30,000 NIS in court fees.

Moral:
Even insurance policies must pass the test of "common sense."