asked the Minister for Industry and Commerce whether he is aware that an Irish assurance company have refused to pay on foot of a life insurance policy (particulars supplied) for the sum of £1,000 on the ground that the policy holder died in an aeroplane crash and that the company's liability in such cases was limited to the amount of premiums paid; and that this restriction which was never explained to the policy holder on his taking out the policy is not imposed by other Irish and non-Irish companies and has resulted in severe hardship to the deceased's family; whether he has authority to require assurance companies to explain such unusual conditions to persons taking out policies; and if he will investigate the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Conditions of Life Insurance Policies.
23.
This matter is one of detailed insurance operation in which I am not empowered to intervene.
I am informed that under the terms of a normal life assurance policy the company is liable for the full amount where death occurs as a result of travelling as a fare-paying passenger on a public airline. Where death occurs, as it did in the case referred to in the Deputy's question, as a result of engaging in aviation otherwise than as a fare-paying passenger on a public airline, liability is normally limited to a sum based on the amount paid in premiums. This restriction is clearly stated on the policy.
I understand that the restriction in question is not peculiar to a particular Irish company.
Is the Minister aware that the deceased, who was a passenger on this plane, was killed on the 18th April, 1959, that the solicitor for the next-of-kin applied to the insurance company concerned, namely, the Irish Assurance Company, on the 28th April, 1959, for a claim form but that, prior to that claim form being filled in, this insurance company wrote back repudiating all responsibility? Will the Minister explain to me why it is that the insurance company, under clause 7 of the policy, was able to do that while the company which insured the other individual who was on the plane paid up? How is it that an Irish company failed or, shall I say, by sharp practice, avoided its responsibility while a company that is outside the State was willing and anxious to meet its commitments in that regard?
The Minister is not empowered to intervene in this case. It may be that insurance companies differ in their practices.
Would the Minister be in a position to say if consideration would be given by the Government to this matter in view of this sharp practice by the insurance company?
That is a different matter.
I have no evidence of sharp practice.
Of course the Minister has evidence that it is sharp practice. It is a disgraceful performance on the part of the Irish Assurance Company.