DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

[PM]

For information:

Dear Friends,

                                As per available information United India Insurance Co has clarified through their letter dt 13.11.15. to member banks on basic exclusions   on  coverage to retirees under New Medi Claim Insurance scheme on following.

1.Maternity Expenses

2.Critical Illness Cover

3.Domiciliary Expenses

4.Corporate Buffer

5.Dependents ie Only Retiree & Spouse.

As per FAQ released earlier, by M/s K M Dastur Reinsurance Brokers P Ltd,on behalf of IBA,  on retirees policy domiciliary cover was explained/high lighted   in detail and there was no reference on non availability of the cover to retirees.

Details are awaited.

[PM]

Dear Friends,

                                    General Secretary ,All India Bank Retirees Federation has, already taken up the matter with Chairman ,IBA,on exclusion  of claim on Domiciliary treatment by retirees, under new Medi Claim Insurance Scheme vide  Ref: No.2015/270 dated 16.11.2015.

                                    Copy of the above letter is furnished here under for information of all:

To

"The Chairman Indian Bank Association ( IBA )

Mumbai

Dear Sir,

          Re: IBA approved medical scheme for bank retirees

Re: Reimbursement of Domiciliary Expenses

                        ____________________

                               We are getting very disturbing and shocking information from TPA as well as from some individual banks who are responsible for implementation of the IBA approved medical scheme for the retirees under 10th wage settlement that facility of reimbursement of domiciliary expenses will not be available to the bank retirees and their spouses under group insurance policy.

2. On careful scrutiny of various clauses of the scheme which is a part of the bipartite settlement as applicable to the retirees, it is no where directly or indirectly mentioned in the scheme that facility of reimbursement of domiciliary expenses for eligible ailments will not be available to the retirees and their spouses. In fact the bank retirees were induced and encouraged to opt for this group medi claim policy based on this attractive feature.

3. Now when bank retirees in large number have already exercised option to buy this policy , their accounts have been debited for payment of premiums and policy has come in to force from 1.11.2015 , to advise them at this stage by TPA / bank managements that domiciliary facility will not be available to retirees is nothing but gross and blatant violation of the clause of the scheme , suppression of the vital clause of the policy and non discloser of vital information from the customer.

4. We request IBA to immediately clarify the position and prevail upon Insurance Company, Insurance Broking firm, TPA and bank managements to strictly follow terms and condition of the scheme as sanctioned under the settlement and withdraw their communications issued by them in this regard in recent past to avoid any litigation in this regard.

With Regards,

Yours Sincerely

Sd/-

(S.C.JAIN)

GENERAL SECRETARY "

[MANOHAR SHARMA]

COPY OF UIICL CLARIFICATION:

--
Visit our blog site http:://bankpensioner.blogspot.com
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bankpensioner" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bankpensione...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bankpensioner.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[MANOHAR SHARMA]

 First page of FAQ released earlier, by M/s K M Dastur Reinsurance Brokers P Ltd 

on  behalf of M/S Unted India Insurance Co.

 

[PM]

Dear Friends,

                           In the light of letter of UIICO addressed to Bank CEOs dated 13th Nov15,on exclusion of coverage to retirees under different heads including Domiciliary Treatment,GS of AIBEA too have taken up the issue with CEO of Indian banks Association vide their letter Ref No.AIBEA/GS/2015/90 dated 16th November, 2015,the copy of which is furnished here under for information:

To

'Chief Executive

Indian Banks’ Association

Mumbai.

Reg: Attempts to backtrack from the agreed to Medical

reimbursement policy by United India Insurance Co.

While the newly introduced Group Medical Reimbursement Scheme for the

employees and retirees is slowly getting normalised, we are highly disturbed

to be informed that United India Insurance Company has sent a mail to

various Banks on 13-11-2015 stating that their Policy will not cover the

following in the case of retirees:

1. Maternity Expenses.

2. Critical Illness Cover.

3. Domiciliary Expenses.

4. Corporate Buffer

5. Dependents are not covered ( Only employee + Spouse).

In their email, UIIC has also stated that “Please note that the 100% premium

will be refunded to retirees (subject to NIL claims till date) if retirees of the

Banks are not interested to continue the policy those who have remitted the

premium to us.”

In this connection, please refer to the following provisions in Schedule IV as

well as Appendix I and II under the recent 10th BP Settlement signed by IBA

on 25-5-2015 with the Unions:

Ø The new Scheme as applicable to the officers/ employees in service would be

continued beyond their retirement/superannuation/resignation, etc. subject to

payment of stipulated premium by them.

Ø The new Scheme would also cover the existing retired officers/ employees of

the Banks and dependent spouse subject to payment of stipulated premium by

them.

Ø While reimbursement to the officers / employees shall be made by the Banks as

hitherto, the Scheme shall be administered by the Banks through a scheme

worked out between IBA/Banks and Insurance companies and officers /

employees would in no way be directly bound by the terms and conditions of

such scheme or arrangements.

Ø Continuity benefits coverage to officers / employees on retirement and also to

the Retired Officers / employees, who may be inducted in the Scheme. ( Clause

1.2.2 of Appendix I of X BPS)

Ø Under Clause 1.4 of Appendix 1 of X BPS, Corporate Buffer is provided for.

Ø Under Clause 2.11 and 2.12 Appendix 1 of X BPS, DOMICILIARY

HOSPITALIZATION and DOMICILIARY HOSPITALIZATION are covered under the

scheme.

Ø Clause 3.1 of Appendix 1 of X BPS : Domiciliary Hospitalization / Domiciliary

Treatment : Medical expenses incurred in case of the following diseases which

need Domiciliary Hospitalization /domiciliary treatment as may be certified by

the attending medical practitioner and / or bank's ’medical officer shall be

deemed as hospitalization expenses and reimbursed to the extent of 100%

Ø There would be a continuity of this Scheme / benefits to the Retiring Officers /

employees and their family and also to the Retired Officers / employees and

their family.

Ø Clause 6 of Appendix II : The allocation and use of this Corporate Buffer would

rest with the individual management of the member bank. At the end of the

year we would have a joint review on how many banks have totally utilized

their Corporate Buffer and how many other member banks have not utilized

their Corporate Buffer totally. The unutilized Corporate Buffer of the member

banks would now be proportionately available to the member banks whose

Corporate Buffer has been totally utilized. This would be one of the

major benefits of the Group underwriting of all the member banks under

one policy

While the above are some of the provisions of the Settlement, it is totally

impossible for UIIC to go back on these provisions after the commencement

of the Policy and payment of premium to them.

Not covering maternity expenses of the retirees is understandable but still it

is ridiculous to mention it.

Critical illness cover is also applicable to the employees only as it is clearly

mentioned in the Scheme/Settlement.

But domiciliary treatment and corporate buffer are integral part and

conditions of the Scheme and cannot be separated for the retirees.

The whole scheme has been worked out with all these ingredients and

removing any portion of it will make the whole scheme to fall.

Further, UIIC’s position that “ Please note that the 100% premium will be

refunded to retirees (subject to NIL claims till date) if retirees of the Banks

are not interested to continue the policy, those who have remitted the

premium to us ” is absolutely untenable and illegal at this stage. We feel

that UIIC has crossed the line wrongly.

We are highly disturbed and agitated about these developments. UIIC

cannot take IBA and UFBU for granted. UIIC cannot play with the bank

employees like this.

IBA’s immediate and urgent intervention is necessary.

We await,

Yours faithfully,

C.H. VENKATACHALAM

GENERAL SECRETARY'

On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 13:24:29 UTC+5:30, PM wrote:

[bhaskara sarma]

I never believed that domiciliary cover will be extended for retirees.This is a trick played by them.

They want to earn profits out of every business and try to reject claims if they have the slightest doubt.I don't believe the cover will be restored.

P B Sarma.

[Anil Verma]

The denial of domiciliary treatment etc. by United inda insurance company to bank pensioners is breech of trust and how can the company back track from the agreed agriment once they have received the primum. Pensioners organisations should think of legal remadies in the matter, since AIBEA has already taken up the matter IBA in the mean time they should advise their units in all bank to ignore giving business to united insurance in all their outlets since they are cheating ordinary people too in similar fashion by mis selling these products.Bank pensioners should fight out this matter and should ensure that no such backtracking is done in future too in any manner by the company.

A.K.Verma.

[PM]

For Information: 

 

Text of All India Bank Officers’ Association vide its ref No.IBA:BKS:182:2015

November 19, 2015,addressed a letter to IBA, which is self explanatory is furnished here under for information:

 

 

 

To

The Chairman,

Indian Banks’ Association,

Mumbai.

 

 

 

Sir,

 

REG:              INSURANCE BACKED HOSPITALISATION SCHEME

      FOR RETIRED STAFF.

 

We draw your kind attention to the 7^th Joint Note signed by Four Officers’ Organizations with IBA on 25^th may 2015 at Mumbai.

 

2)         In terms of Clause 10 of the Joint Note, the details of reimbursement of hospitalization expenses has been listed out in the annexure IV of the Joint Note.

 

3)         In terms of Clause 5.10 of the appendix I of the 7^th Joint Note, there would be a continuity of this scheme / benefits to the retiring officers/ employees and their family and also to the retired officers/ employees and their family.

 

4)         It is hereby reliably learnt that United India Insurance, the service provider has informed the member banks directly that some of the facilities like corporate Buffer, Maternity expenses, Critical Illness cover, Domiciliary expenses, dependents not covered, are not available to the retired employees.

 

5)         Unilateral action by the service provider after the commencement of the Insurance cover w.e.f 1.11.2015 is unacceptable to our Organization.

 

6)         This issue of Insurance backed Hospitalization scheme was piloted by the management during Negotiation and ultimately the issue has been achieved as a part of the 7^th Joint Note exercise.

 

7)         Further, in the record note of the discussions between IBA with UFBU on the issues and to the demands relating to the retirees of the Banks held on 25.05.2015, categorically states that, ……benefits of the coverage of this scheme would be extended to retirees also subject to the conditions that the cost of the Insurance premium under the scheme would be payable to retirees”.

 

8)         As there is departure in the understanding arrived at between 4 officers organizations and IBA unilaterally by the service provider independently, Our Organization urges upon the IBA to convene  a meeting of all negotiating Unions, on an urgent basis to avoid the avoidable conflicts in the present wage revision exercise concluded in May 2015.

 

We expect your immediate response to resolve an artificial issue created by the service provider.

 

 

Yours faithfully,

  

/S.NAGARAJAN/

GENERAL SECRETARY

On Tuesday, 17 November 2015 13:24:29 UTC+5:30, PM wrote:

[Prasad C N]

Dear friends,

No one need to worry about payment of domiciliary treatment expenses.  BPS & JN clarly provides for payment of agreed benefits by the Bank, irrespective their arrangement with Insurance Companies.

Following paragraphs are extracted from BPS, which support our stand :

While reimbursement to the officers / employees shall be made by the Banks as hitherto, the

Scheme shall be administered by the Banks through a scheme worked out between

IBA/Banks and Insurance companies and officers / employees would in no way be directly

bound by the terms and conditions of such scheme or arrangements.

However, for the purpose of clarity and information, the details of the Scheme worked out

between IBA/Banks and insurance companies is appended herein as Appendix I & II.

There would be a continuity of this Scheme / benefits to the Retiring Officers / employees and their

family and also to the Retired Officers / employees and their family.

Therefore Insurance Company has no right to say what is payable or not payable.

 

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards, 

Prasad C N

---

From: PM <moha...@gmail.com>
To: bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, 22 November 2015 1:36 PM
Subject: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

--

[cpvnair]

A very positive, hopeful observation.

 

 

 

Warm reg

 

 

 

CPVNAIR

[rajasekar venkatesan]

Dear Prasad

I am afraid that this is applicable only to serving employees and not retirees

Regards

 

Rajasekar Venkatesan

Singapore

---

From: 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 1:58 PM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (bankpe...@googlegroups.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

[ankalraju ankalraju]

Dear Friends

Mr.Prasad has said that the individual banks will make the reimbursement  as per the BP & JN and the employees are in no  way bound by terms and conditions of the insurance companies.

In case of serving employees their claims will be routed through the concerned banks. Hence they may not have any problems in getting their claims settled. But in respect of existing retirees their claims have to be routed through the TPA only. They have to depend on the

TPA only.

With regards,

Ankalraju.

[K S R Mohan Rao]

While calling for consent letters banks have stated that they are acting as intermediaries and in no way responsible for what is admissible/payable by the insurance company which is to be noted. 

[kknanda5]

What is wrong or what is right is not the issue. The issue TPA has refused to reimburse domiciliary treatment expenditure and willing to refund the premium. Retirees Assond have addressed letters to IBA but there is no reply. IBA as usual will remain silent and signatories of Bipartite unless takes up the seriously then we have to raise our hands.

[giris...@yahoo.co.in]

Mr CN Prasad u r absolutely wrong in saying that banks are liable to pay as per joint note

Banks and IBA are simply the facilitators

They have no legal liability towards any one.u can say moral responsibility to get us what they committed. Nothing more.we r loosers at the moment. 

Rgds.

Sent from my BlackBerry 10 smartphone.

From: 'kknanda5' via bankpensioner Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2015 10:00 To: bankpensioner; 'Prasad Reply To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

--

[kknanda5]

Please refresh all the resources. Impending danger Domiciliary treatment to retirees are denied and Uiic has conveyed that they may refund the premium received.

On Nov 23, 2015 5:01 PM, 'rajasekar venkatesan' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Dear Prasad

I am afraid that this is applicable only to serving employees and not retirees

Regards

 

Rajasekar Venkatesan

Singapore

From: 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 1:58 PM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (bankpe...@googlegroups.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

[bhaskara sarma]

There is MOU dated 29/10/1993,signed between IBA and AIBEA,(ratified by other unions subsequently),providing for 100 percent DA neutralisation and updation.Both the parties are very respectable,hale and healthy and thriving.Both these parties never thought of implementing their own written and signed MOU.Then how we can expect UIIco can be forced to honour its commitment.There are many instances wherein the Institutions backed out of their commitments including UTI when they find tight spot.

P B Sarma.

--

[Prasanna K Nanda]

Dear Mr. Prasad,

As we know, the claims are made to the TPAs and they settle the claims ! But as per the agreement extract , will the claims be made to Banks for reimbursement ? Is this IBA scheme different with regard to reimbursement of claims from employees and retirees ?

P K Nanda,

UBI VRS, Bhubaneswar.

Sent from my iPad

[SBMPC Blore]

Dear friends,

No one need to worry about payment of domiciliary treatment expenses.  BPS & JN clarly provides for payment of agreed benefits by the Bank, irrespective their arrangement with Insurance Companies.

Following paragraphs are extracted from BPS, which support our stand :

While reimbursement to the officers / employees shall be made by the Banks as hitherto, the

Scheme shall be administered by the Banks through a scheme worked out between

IBA/Banks and Insurance companies and officers / employees would in no way be directly

bound by the terms and conditions of such scheme or arrangements.

However, for the purpose of clarity and information, the details of the Scheme worked out

between IBA/Banks and insurance companies is appended herein as Appendix I & II.

There would be a continuity of this Scheme / benefits to the Retiring Officers / employees and their

family and also to the Retired Officers / employees and their family.

--

[Rampalli prasada rao]

sir,

LET US BE CONFIDENT THAT ONE YEAR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE IBA AND INSURANCE COMPANIES IS PROVIDING THE TREATMENT AS PER AGREEMENT, WHICH IS GUARANTEED AND NO ONE CAN VIOLATE IT BUT WE DON'T KNOW THE NEXT YEAR POSITION I.E. PREMIUM WILL BE INCREASED OR CONDITIONS MAY APPLY . ONE YEAR WE ARE SAFE.

--

[Prasad C N]

Dear friend,

For your benefit, I am reproducing following paragraph, which is extracted from Joint Note :

1)  While reimbursement to the officers / employees shall be made by the Banks as hitherto, the

Scheme shall be administered by the Banks through a scheme worked out between

IBA/Banks and Insurance companies and officers / employees would in no way be directly

bound by the terms and conditions of such scheme or arrangements.

2)  However, for the purpose of clarity and information, the details of the Scheme worked out

between IBA/Banks and insurance companies is appended herein as Appendix I & II.

3)   There would be a continuity of this Scheme / benefits to the Retiring Officers / employees and their

family and also to the Retired Officers / employees and their family.

These clauses also find reference to letters written by UFBU, AIBEA, etc   One needs to read clause 3 together with clauses 1 & 2.  I am also attaching joint note.  Please go through and find out whether these clauses are there or not.

Please understand that the Insurance Company has also entered into agreement, accepting same terms & conditions.  Presentations made by them or the Broker in their presence, clearly informed that the domiciliary treatment benefit is available to retirees.  

 

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards, 

Prasad C N

---

From: girishdora via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: bankpe...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 24 November 2015 11:43 AM

[Prasad C N]

Dear Mr.Mohan Rao,

Bipartite Settlement is signed as per ID Act and enforceable as a statute.  There is a legal prinicple 'No estoppel against statute'.  SBM VRS retirees have won the case with cost and interest in KHC division bench (One of the Judge is the Judge of the Hon'ble Supreme Court) on this principle also.

 

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards, 

Prasad C N

---

From: K S R Mohan Rao <mohanr...@gmail.com>
To: bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 November 2015 9:58 PM
Subject: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

--

[Prasad C N]

Dear Shri Rajashekar,

I have extracted from the letter by AIBEA to IBA, with regard to Domiciliary Treatment issue, which is self explicit. These paras find place in Bipartite Settlement/Joint Note  :

In this connection, please refer to the following provisions in Schedule IV as

well as Appendix I and II under the recent 10th BP Settlement signed by IBA

on 25-5-2015 with the Unions:

The new Scheme as applicable to the officers/ employees in service would be

continued beyond their retirement/superannuation/resignation, etc. subject to

payment of stipulated premium by them.

The new Scheme would also cover the existing retired officers/ employees of

the Banks and dependent spouse subject to payment of stipulated premium by

them.

 

Thanks, a Million. With regards, Prasad C N

---

From: 'rajasekar venkatesan' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 November 2015 5:01 PM

[Sastry TVPC]

I think Mr. Prasad is right. The Parties to the BPS and joint note do not include the Insurance service provider. The Banks having signed it are bound to honour their commitments.

[rajasekar venkatesan]

Dear Sri Prasad

As far these extracts are concerned, you prove to be correct.

But, let us wait and see how IBA and Banks honor their commitments, going by our past experience on similar things.

Thanks and Regards

 

Rajasekar Venkatesan

Singapore

---

From: 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 1:24 AM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (bankpe...@googlegroups.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dear Shri Rajashekar,

I have extracted from the letter by AIBEA to IBA, with regard to Domiciliary Treatment issue, which is self explicit. These paras find place in Bipartite Settlement/Joint Note  :

In this connection, please refer to the following provisions in Schedule IV as

well as Appendix I and II under the recent 10th BP Settlement signed by IBA

on 25-5-2015 with the Unions:

The new Scheme as applicable to the officers/ employees in service would be

continued beyond their retirement/superannuation/resignation, etc. subject to

payment of stipulated premium by them.

The new Scheme would also cover the existing retired officers/ employees of

the Banks and dependent spouse subject to payment of stipulated premium by

them.

 

Thanks, a Million. With regards, Prasad C N

From: 'rajasekar venkatesan' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 November 2015 5:01 PM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

Dear Prasad

I am afraid that this is applicable only to serving employees and not retirees

Regards

 

Rajasekar Venkatesan

Singapore

From: 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 1:58 PM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (bankpe...@googlegroups.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dear friends,

No one need to worry about payment of domiciliary treatment expenses.  BPS & JN clarly provides for payment of agreed benefits by the Bank, irrespective their arrangement with Insurance Companies.

Following paragraphs are extracted from BPS, which support our stand :

While reimbursement to the officers / employees shall be made by the Banks as hitherto, the

Scheme shall be administered by the Banks through a scheme worked out between

IBA/Banks and Insurance companies and officers / employees would in no way be directly

bound by the terms and conditions of such scheme or arrangements.

However, for the purpose of clarity and information, the details of the Scheme worked out

between IBA/Banks and insurance companies is appended herein as Appendix I & II.

There would be a continuity of this Scheme / benefits to the Retiring Officers / employees and their

family and also to the Retired Officers / employees and their family.

Therefore Insurance Company has no right to say what is payable or not payable.

 

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards, 

Prasad C N

--

[kknanda5]

We know the contents
But what is the audacity of TPA and Insurance Co to refuse and gone to the extent of offering to refund the premium
Our Asson should settle the matter within the ambit of settlement.

[rajasekar venkatesan]

Dear All

Atleast, canara bank seem to be non-committal on this issue by just reproducing the communication from UIICo

 

Rajasekar Venkatesan

Singapore

---

From: 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2015 1:24 AM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (bankpe...@googlegroups.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dear Shri Rajashekar,

I have extracted from the letter by AIBEA to IBA, with regard to Domiciliary Treatment issue, which is self explicit. These paras find place in Bipartite Settlement/Joint Note  :

In this connection, please refer to the following provisions in Schedule IV as

well as Appendix I and II under the recent 10th BP Settlement signed by IBA

on 25-5-2015 with the Unions:

The new Scheme as applicable to the officers/ employees in service would be

continued beyond their retirement/superannuation/resignation, etc. subject to

payment of stipulated premium by them.

The new Scheme would also cover the existing retired officers/ employees of

the Banks and dependent spouse subject to payment of stipulated premium by

them.

 

Thanks, a Million. With regards, Prasad C N

---

From: 'rajasekar venkatesan' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 November 2015 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

Dear Prasad

I am afraid that this is applicable only to serving employees and not retirees

Regards

 

Rajasekar Venkatesan

Singapore

---

From: 'Prasad C N' via bankpensioner <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
To: "bankpe...@googlegroups.com" <bankpe...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 1:58 PM

Subject: Re: bankpensioner Re: DOMICILIARY COVER FOR RETIREES UNDER NEW MCIS

This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (bankpe...@googlegroups.com) Add cleanup rule | More info

Dear friends,

No one need to worry about payment of domiciliary treatment expenses.  BPS & JN clarly provides for payment of agreed benefits by the Bank, irrespective their arrangement with Insurance Companies.

Following paragraphs are extracted from BPS, which support our stand :

While reimbursement to the officers / employees shall be made by the Banks as hitherto, the

Scheme shall be administered by the Banks through a scheme worked out between

IBA/Banks and Insurance companies and officers / employees would in no way be directly

bound by the terms and conditions of such scheme or arrangements.

However, for the purpose of clarity and information, the details of the Scheme worked out

between IBA/Banks and insurance companies is appended herein as Appendix I & II.

There would be a continuity of this Scheme / benefits to the Retiring Officers / employees and their

family and also to the Retired Officers / employees and their family.

Therefore Insurance Company has no right to say what is payable or not payable.

 

Thanks, a Million. 

With regards, 

Prasad C N

[bhaskara sarma]

This is only a beginning.In future the UIIco will deny other claims also on one pretext or the other.The banks have no responsibility in settling the claims of retirees.The ins co will try to earn profits out of the policy while rejecting the claims,the banks and IBA will be looking the other the way.This is the "Corporate Social Responsibility " shouldered by the commercial banks towards retirees.They can boast of their performance in all fora without spending a single Rupee.A Very Great Innovative Idea!

P B Sarma.