Deloitte refusal to confirm employment termination – impact on income protection insurance claim

Brynsam

Doshwaster wrote: »

Stories like this are also why I never take out income protection policies as they can be so hard to claim on.

Usually because people haven't read them carefully enough to suss out what they've actually insured themselves against. Being unemployed because you were fired (other than genuine redundancy - and that normally required a minimum period of service, which will be clearly stipulated in the policy document) isn't likely to be covered.

neilio

He was not made redundant. He did not resign. He did not commit gross misconduct. He was not sick either. He consulted an employment lawyer specifically on whether he should’ve been made redundant but was told there is nothing that can be done due to working there less than two years. Apparently, if under two years of service, the employer can terminate employment without giving a reason such as in this situation. What puzzles us is why Deloitte cannot confirm this happened.

He has explained in depth to Cigna, who has informed him they will pay out if he can prove he was terminated rather than resigning or committing gross misconduct. If he had been made redundant, he would be eligible. We’re crossing our fingers that the letter inviting him to the performance review meeting and PILON will suffice.

Thanks for all the responses. Obviously saving enough money to not require income protection insurance is the ideal scenario (thanks for stating the obvious there Doshwaster); there are hundreds of different reasons why we may not have enough savings just now.

Doshwaster

neilio wrote: »

He was not made redundant. He did not resign. He did not commit gross misconduct. He was not sick either. He consulted an employment lawyer specifically on whether he should’ve been made redundant but was told there is nothing that can be done due to working there less than two years. Apparently, if under two years of service, the employer can terminate employment without giving a reason such as in this situation. What puzzles us is why Deloitte cannot confirm this happened.

That's right - up to 2 years they don't need to give a reason and unless you feel you have been discriminated against there is very little you can do.

Deloitte probably should have given a termination letter even if it was just a standard boilerplate, but it is a fact of life with the big consulting firms that you are just a line on a spreadsheet along with 250,000 other people.

I was just fortunate that I had been with my firm for 3 years so was entitled to a redundancy payment even though it was only at statutory levels. After spending 10 weeks on the bench I had already started to look for a new job. Bench Time is seriously bad for for long term career so I knew my days were numbers.

Sorry, I can't advise with the situation with Cigna. I can remember being unable to claim on a PPI policy in the early 2000s (which I recently got my money back for it being misold) following a redundancy so I decided not to bother with such insurance again.

neilio

He had been looking for another job during time on the bench. Neither of us are strangers to working for large and small consultancy firms and spending some time on the bench. This is not in question really. My point is, how does one make one provide evidence of what happened.

[Deleted User]

Have you ever tried for a reference request? Asking as a small business owner, who has already taken someone on and asking very direct questions could draw out the information.

I worked for a household name and to say you only got dates of employment out of them would be hilarious. Despite being invited into a notice meeting, despite 'local HR' firmly saying no other jobs could I apply for at the immediate time, despite their writing off of holiday owed - the written reference was interesting. I definitely learnt a lesson if there is ever a next time on what I failed to ask as they gave me the tools to write my notice as the only thing the "basic" ! reference didn't answer was my attendance and sickness record (crikey you have won if you had a lot of time off in my old place) but it certainly touched upon job title at leaving and reason for job leaving. Written by someone unconnected and miles away who has zero idea at the damage they could create and clearly don't have full HR files so I would urge you to try this route.

stator

Would it be worth a try writing a letter to Deloitte HR department asking why they have not paid his salary (on a date after his termination), or disputing the calculation of his severance?
He might get a letter back which inadvertently confirms his termination?

Paul_DNAP

Write a letter to Deloitte saying that if they won't confirm that his employment was ended then your hubby will assume that he must therefore be still employed by them and he will be taking them to the small claims court for unpaid wages forthwith.

Wayne_O_Mac

The PILON issue doesn't strengthen your case as much as you think. It can (albeit very rarely) be paid when an employee resigns.

sangie595

Paul_DNAP wrote: »

Write a letter to Deloitte saying that if they won't confirm that his employment was ended then your hubby will assume that he must therefore be still employed by them and he will be taking them to the small claims court for unpaid wages forthwith.

Don't be ridiculous. In the first place they have confirmed it has ended - they refuse to say why; and secondly, there is no actionable event in "my employer refuses to provide my insurer with a letter they don't have to provide".

steampowered

It seems very strange that Deloitte aren't prepared to confirm basic termination details.

For an insurance policy that they presumably arranged as an employee benefit ! !

I would try to escalate this within Human Resources. Make it very clear what is required by the insurer, and perhaps try to escalate to someone more senior if you don't get anywhere.

If your husband had to, I am sure he could force Deloitte to provide this information through a court process known as 'third party disclosure'. Best to try and resolve it amicably with HR first though.