MouthShut.com Would Like to Send You Push Notifications. Notification may includes alerts, activities & updates.

OTP Verification

Enter 4-digit code
For Business
MouthShut Logo
32 Tips
×

Upload your product photo

Supported file formats : jpg, png, and jpeg

Address



Contact Number

Cancel

I feel this review is:

Fake
Genuine

To justify genuineness of your review kindly attach purchase proof
No File Selected

Unit linked insurance plans
Sep 08, 2006 08:18 PM 5078 Views
(Updated Mar 12, 2007 05:52 PM)

Dear reader,


We are a consumer organization and we receive consumer complaints through our portal https://consumer.org.in. In the recent past we have seen some interesting activity which a common Indian needs to understand.


This is related to Insurance business. Our Govt. Of India allowed private operators to compete with our long standing and most successful Insurance sector the LIC of India and the General Insurance of India. Unlike other sectors, MNC's jumped for this and very soon they found this to be a loosing proposition.  So they thought of some schemes where they could earn an extra dime. They came with  a fantasy and come out with the Unit linked Insurance scheme. Unit linked because of 2 reasons. First they are not permitted to enter into the financial instruments directly. Secondly this will be a a source of income both for financial trading and insurance. So far so good.


But the question is that why should a financial instrument be linked with Insurance and how come the Government has given permission. It is evident of links with the higher authorities. The government machinery should be clear that the financial sector should not be mixed with Insurance sector. The 2 should be kept separate and should function separately.


As the scheme is explained by the seller to


the purchaser by pep talks, it appears to be very good, but when you


read the fine print then you come to know that it has draconian effect.


the worst part is the firat year allocation charges of the premium you


pay to the company. In most of the cases if the fine print is studied


carefully then you come to know that 20 - 25% and in some cases /


schemes, 30% of the investment you pay for the first year is allocated


by the company for its expenses. That means that only 70-75% of your


investment is invested for the the returns. Is it not draconian loss to


the investor. I have been asking the companies to give the logic for


25-30% appropriation to expenses account. They say that the major


funds go to the Investment managers. That means that the managers


handling the investment portfolio take away around 20%. This is their


net income. Now when they suggest investment, any returns that come or


not is your luck. they have already earned 20% of your investment to


their kitty. When we feel the other way round. The investment managers


should say that what ever profit we arrange for you, we will charge 20


%. This sounds good as to earn their profit they will have to make


genuine efforts. So beware and check for the antecedents of the company


and managers. Better is to go for other sources of investment which


give the same returns and safer returns. Now when you invest 20 to 25%


as your net loss, and if you land up earning 8% return on your 75%


investment amount you will take 5 years to brake-even you investment


amount.So where is the question of any gains.


These are the points one need to think before the act.


Upload Photo

Upload Photos


Upload photo files with .jpg, .png and .gif extensions. Image size per photo cannot exceed 10 MB


Comment on this review

Read All Reviews

X