Redundancy Protection Insurance

controller72

My brother in law was recently made redundant but had taken out a 6 year protection package the policy expired on 31 Dec 08 and he was made redundant on Dec 8 2008. Thinking he was covered he filed a claims form only to be told because the policy expires 3 weeks later and they do not pay for the first twelve weeks, that he was not entitled to anything and obviously could not extend the policy because he already knew he was redundant. Basically he paid for a 6 year policy but was only covered for 5yrs 9 months. Surely the policy should cover him until the expiry date. He is not expecting a payout straight the way but did think after 12 weeks he would get paid. Basically if you are made redundant in the last twelve weeks of the policy then they say they do not have to payout. I think this is a total copout, or am I wrong?

Spendless

Is there anything in the small print about it?

controller72

I have no idea will have to check that out, I am pushing him he just accepts what they say.

piggeh

Sounds like a call to the Financial Ombudsman in my opinion.

maninthestreet

The policy probably states that you can't make a claim for the first 12 weeks following redundancy, by which time the policy has expired. Harsh though it may seem, the insurer is probably right in rejecting the claim.

Sterlingtimes

The article at:

http://www.moneymarketing.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=176456

is the most informed that I can find on this issue and makes for some interesting reading albeit that it is three months old now.