27.11.99
Financial Mail on Sunday
With effect from 1st September 1992. "...the
Life Assured has not suffered from any attributed signs or symptoms and has not
received any medical treatment or advice attributed to the following
disabilities which are first contracted after the effective date of this
endorsement."
This only suggests diagnosed
conditions and thereafter. However, the argument would still be about when "first
contracted" is defined. If dated before 1.9.92 then a claim denial would
follow regardless of diagnosis date.
January 1993. "...we
would not be able to accept a claim in respect of the above four conditions if,
prior to 1st September 1992, any problems associated with any of them had been
experienced."
This clarifies the Abbey Life disclaimer. Any problems
- not proven to be associated (pre-diagnosis). Retrospective exclusion allowed.
Imagine: unilateral partial deafness:
Abbey Life - obviously a benign brain tumour.
Specialist ENT consultants opinion: no indication of
neoplastic disease, probably cochlear damage (impact damage).
With effect from 1st January 1996. "...if
prior to the effective date, the Life Assured has suffered from any signs or
symptoms, or has received any treatment or advice, attributable to the
disabilities and surgical procedures..."
This makes it even clearer - before diagnosis is
explicit. Attributable in the meaning that Abbey Life can attribute even if this is not
the true medical opinion. Everything is expediently disregarded. Everything
that points to an erroneous judgement.
Éretrospective exclusion policy operating whereby when
the condition has been diagnosed and the medical history becomes available
suitable symptoms can be selected with no intention of stating what they
areÉclaimed that by October 1995 Abbey Life had reports judged to
indicate the condition on which the denial was based...no condition was known
at that time...diagnosis November 1996Éwhat are the
Òsigns and symptomsÓ or Òassociated symptomsÓ that could not be indicators of
something else in the absence of a diagnosis.
Only future events (onward from November 1996) tended to confirm the
original diagnosisÉno biopsy was/is possible, so even now this is informed
opinion Ð based on an Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) scan.
Note the requirements to enable the diagnosis of Multiple
Sclerosis be made. A positive diagnosis may take years. It may be suspected, but
not finally determined until events are witnessed, that might then only be
transitoryÉwould probably be regarded as pre-existing symptoms and a claim will
fail. This would become a technical argument much like my own. But a diabolical
Catch 22 - the diagnosis cannot be made without them.
And a claim will never succeed with them.