- Joined
- Oct 7, 2008
- Messages
- 49
- Points
- 0
SINGAPORE: A policyholder has sued AIA Singapore Pte Ltd for breach of contract, claiming that the insurance company did not fulfil the terms of payment as stated in a policy quotation document provided to her.
AIA is, however, disputing that the policy quotation document does not have a contractual effect and the figures cited were for illustration and were not guaranteed.
The High Court heard on June 25 that Madam Zhu Yong Zhen had bought a Singapore Financial Guardian policy from AIA in 1993 after being given a policy quotation by her insurance agent.
From the policy quotation, which had an assured sum of S$100,000 and policy premium of S$2,091.50, she had to pay premiums for the first 16 years.
The policy premiums for the subsequent years will be paid from cash dividends accumulated over the years.
Mdm Zhu, 49, eventually decided to buy the policy with an assured sum of S$200,000.
She did not ask to see the policy quotation during the purchase.
In her opening statement on June 25, Mdm Zhu, who holds a Masters in Computer Science from Wuhan University, said she believed the policy values for S$200,000 would be doubled from the quotation of S$100,000.
During cross-examination, Mdm Zhu insisted that the policy quotation had a contractual effect.
She asserted she was "a lay person" who was merely following what her agent had told her and did not ask further questions because she trusted AIA's reputation.
Mdm Zhu's policy has been suspended since 2009 and she commenced legal action against AIA Singapore in the same year.
The High Court dismissed her lawsuit a year later, but her case was later reinstated by the Court of Appeal.
AIA has counter-claimed for defamation, alleging Mdm Zhu wrote on her blog about the dispute with the insurance company.
Mdm Zhu denies the claim.
The hearing is set to continue on June 27.
- TODAY
AIA is, however, disputing that the policy quotation document does not have a contractual effect and the figures cited were for illustration and were not guaranteed.
The High Court heard on June 25 that Madam Zhu Yong Zhen had bought a Singapore Financial Guardian policy from AIA in 1993 after being given a policy quotation by her insurance agent.
From the policy quotation, which had an assured sum of S$100,000 and policy premium of S$2,091.50, she had to pay premiums for the first 16 years.
The policy premiums for the subsequent years will be paid from cash dividends accumulated over the years.
Mdm Zhu, 49, eventually decided to buy the policy with an assured sum of S$200,000.
She did not ask to see the policy quotation during the purchase.
In her opening statement on June 25, Mdm Zhu, who holds a Masters in Computer Science from Wuhan University, said she believed the policy values for S$200,000 would be doubled from the quotation of S$100,000.
During cross-examination, Mdm Zhu insisted that the policy quotation had a contractual effect.
She asserted she was "a lay person" who was merely following what her agent had told her and did not ask further questions because she trusted AIA's reputation.
Mdm Zhu's policy has been suspended since 2009 and she commenced legal action against AIA Singapore in the same year.
The High Court dismissed her lawsuit a year later, but her case was later reinstated by the Court of Appeal.
AIA has counter-claimed for defamation, alleging Mdm Zhu wrote on her blog about the dispute with the insurance company.
Mdm Zhu denies the claim.
The hearing is set to continue on June 27.
- TODAY
