11

The cosy arrangments of Insurers and Specialists

by Whaleoil on May 30, 2010

Fidelity Life | We Don't Care, So you Don't have toThis post is to demonstrate just how cosy the arrangements are between insurance companies and their chosen professionals that they use to root you over. In particular the relationship between Ralf Schnabel and Fidelity Life.

One of the so-called profesionals that was used to provide “evidence” of my complete recovery from depression was Ralf Schnabel.

In the past 6 years he has met me precisely once and then for 3 hours. Not the full three hours ind, just the first 40 minutes and the last 30 minutes, the rest of the time was spent filling out a complex set of questions to ascertain whether or not my cognitive functions were impaired. Not surprisingly they aren’t, though his tests do conclusively show I suffer depression (amongst other things) and not only that, the depression is above average. Fidelity Life used this test as the basis of saying that because my cognitive functions are un-impaired and that I have had a head injury then I can work full time. Of course the fact that Schnabel broke all the rules in the book in publishing the showing the graphs, scores and results completely out of context is beside the point.

It isn’t surprising then to note that Mr Ralf Schnabel has a nice cosy relationship with Fidelity Life. So cosy that he gets invited to speak at the quarterly meeting of the Auckland Branch of Life And Disability Underwriting & Claims Assessors Association.

The cosy arrangements of Fidelity Life and their professionals

The cosy arrangements of Fidelity Life and their professionals

Note that the chair and one of the committee members are from Fidelity Life. Cindy Morby and Mark Brown. I’m sure they are nice folk, but the company they work for isn’t. I wonder if Ralf shared just exactly how good his role is for the industry is getting rid of pesky, annoying claimants, who won’t get well on the insurance company’s time-frame?

LADUCA’s newsletter also makes for interesting reading. Especially the article on how to ensure you drag the chain on claims as long as possible and put your client through the wringer. Oh sure it isn’t written that way but that is exactly the advice that is being given.

I really do think a select committee should be looking closely at insurance companies, especially if National is thinking that opening up ACC to competition might solve issues.

Since this hit the news I have also been alerted to several cases that Ralf Schnabel is involved in with Fidelity Life. I am talking with those affected, one of whom has a complaint against him before the psychologists board. I will post more details of these cases when the claimants give me permission. Fidelity Life told me that they only rarely use Schnabel (3-4 times per year), yet in the space of one afternoon have found at least three people shafted by this guy and Fidelity Life. I bet if I shake the tree a bit harder I can find some more.

Oh and a Google Search for Fidelity Life is really interesting now.

Tagged: • • • • •

Related posts

  • steviant

    This is what happens when you leave social welfare issues up to private companies. Commercial entities have responsibilities to reduce financial liabilities where possible.

    The behaviour you’re complaining about is called fiduciary duty, and is something you have to accept when you tender for the services of a private company with a greater moral and legal obligation to it’s shareholders than it’s stakeholders.

    You’re experiencing the effects that lead to the creation of institutions like the department of social welfare and the accident compensation commission many years ago. Because private companies need so much oversight that it’s cheaper and better for society to have some things managed for the good of the stakeholders rather than shareholders.

  • xenophon

    I see that your post headed “fuck you very much” referred to in the HOS article has been deleted along with all the comments including your wifes comments which bore careful reading by yourself. You initially relabelled it “the presidents lunch” or similar with the old comments still there … then as at today you’ve deleted it all. Your blog i guess? – your ability to behave like Stalin or “dear leader” and censor your own circle of influence. But you tell others thats not what you stand for. Or is this your playhouse and you throw the toys. You apologise sometimes – but only when pressured to by circumstances. But the damage is already done and you’ve got another notch on your belt.

    I see the HOS article didnt requote your words about James Webster – “thief – liar – poof” (or the actual heading of the post about your house) – when he was only very recently passed away. Will you apologise to the family of James Webster – or to the people of NZ for misusing your power that you have clearly stated is yours to wield? Everyone (it seems) is feeling sorry for you and your family – but will you apologise to the Websters and the people of New Zealand. Some people are so traumatised by you and your blog that they are reduced to getting alerts from others etc about your next nastiness. We saw valuable seconds of a news programme last night taken up by you – with a request for sympathy for you.

    Quite a few people including me, were finally drawn into your perversion of “charlottes web” by the James Webster issue – emails were flying about by people astonished by what you said and continued to say even when a person called “harpoon” queried you on this among others. All you said to that commenter, was “who died and made you my conscience”. It seems to those of us who came into your twilight zone only because of that issue, that there are people out there regarding you as a serious political, social and economic commentator. According to your Wife on TV – its just therapy for you to feel better or at least thats part of what seemed to be implied. And all you could say on your posts about Debra Coddingtons article putting you in perspective on the James Webster issue – was to get visibly upset that you had been dismissed as having no influence. Its seemingly about selfish nasty power – the only influence you have – is other people of a certain type appear to be getting a vicarious ‘fix’ via your persona (that is also actually you). Thats all – nothing more. You appeal to the worst in humanity – or so it seems. When are the National Party going to claim you for their own. You are the worst thing that has ever happened to them.

    Most people have a lot of sympathy for people suffering from depression … but you are using your situation as an excuse to inflict punishment and pain on others when the only mistake they’ve made is to come to your attention (whether they want to or not).

  • xenophon

    And on the the subject of one of your causes … name suppression – at the heart of it is to protect some folk from vicious and damaging attacks. Pity that poor James Webster – who all he did was pass on in an untimely and tragic manner, didnt have name suppression – instead he got done like a dinner by you. You behaved like a calculating and vicious predator – just like the people you say you dont want name suppression for. But even if James Webster did have name suppression you would have made it your lifes work to out him wouldnt you. At least thats judging by your posts that i have read and had to purge from my psyche afterward.

    You are an avowed National Party man – a right wing supporter – feted by the media and photographed with key right wing politicians (including John Key) so you and your ‘ideology’ are the future of us all.

    Go and get some help – sit down and talk with your insurance company – insist on seeing the CEO … but stop inflicting it all as some sort of ’cause’ on the rest of us by naming people and making accusations in front of the whole country.

    Your father is is a businessman and influential with the National Party – he should intervene with you and get you some help if you wont listen to your wife. Why should the NZ population have to suffer your public nonsense any further. Get booked into a proper centre to get weaned off the drugs and get better treatment …. your parents on both sides possibly should have organised something months ago for you out of sheer concern. as for your ‘friends’ – time to take stock. Instead your insurance company is copping all the flak – when you’ve apparently been blogging your intentions and phobias and prejudices for years now – and frankly making pronouncements on all aspects of average peoples lives – and making yourself look competent to live and work? Sounds like you’ve telegraphed your problems for a long time and a lot of other people better able to help than an insurance company could have acted. I insure my car with fintel – i dont expect them to tell me how to drive it after its repaired.

  • fredbanks

    to xenophobe, i am also a recipient of fidelity life non payment policy, my barrister suggested i talk to the CEO so i called him, he refuses to reply to messages and instead the claims manager calls.
    fidelity life are the ones who inflict harm on people who in good faith took out policys which were meant to protect in times of ill health.
    they are commissioners of reports which my lawyer says are fraudulant and they know to fight them is a 80k + high court exercise .

  • xenophon

    fredbanks – the tag is xenophon not xenophobe and that is a spurious connection to make anyway – but thats the behaviour on this blog.

    only suggestions i can make are …

    #1 Contact them again – like now – and request a call back from the CEO – quote client details etc – insist that a claims manager is not suitable and that you have a serious complaint

    #2 Get his email address and their fax number and reiterate the request for dialogue

    #3 Contact your MP and brief them …. keep them in the wings

    Most CEO’s will not refuse – repeat – refuse contact.

    Failing that – in the mainstream media (much maligned on this blog) there is “Fair Go” or similar to refer to.

    Fred – nothing was ever achieved by abuse or denigration … or pointscoring.

  • fredbanks

    i am sorry i mispelt your name. it was not intentional,
    FL refused my claim for 14 months and refused to give me a letter of deadlock which caused me to get very very sick.they finally paid me after i wrote to fair go. when my docs say my condition is permanent they went completely beserk.
    there report of my health is contradicted by 11 doctors yet they stop paying me .its in the hands of a barrister now
    . to make a claim with FL is a nightmare.,it was so difficult i had to employ someone to file all the necessary documents which are on file, 50+ pages of them. yet when i made a surgical claim with IAG it was approved in 48 hours and a letter wishing me all the best. unless uv gone through FLs deliberate non payment methods its really hard to talk about it

  • fredbanks

    back to topic, Fidelity Life denied my claim and part of reason was from policy document comments that a GP may be biased toward me and give medical statements to support my claim.
    i have looked into the person whaleoil refers to ‘ralf schnabel and he was at this meeting for the insurer unpaid so some obligation must exist between the 2 parties one would think
    if he is known to the insurer then surely by there own definition his reports must be inadmissable?

  • xenophon

    Fred – thats ok and thanks for the reply. I (believe it or not) despite my anger at the owner of this blog over the webster issue – do have a truckload of sympathy for the illness and insurance issue.

    Im glad to hear they finally paid out – not glad to hear the problem is ongoing.

    If you ring or give your barrister permission to ring on your behalf – you will be able to get to the top – or at least their General Manager. Only advice i can give (limited though it is) is that you should step outside the normal claims procedure and go to the top and get them responding in black and white … bureaucracies love courts.

    Observation – kiwis are complacent … we dont stand up on our hind legs and insist on a hearing. My issue is – the way the blog owner has gone about this is not good.

    I had an insurance issue … i went through the procedure – then i contacted the CEO personally and wouldnt give up till they responded. – it took say 2 emails to get a resolution. If they can see the human side they generally will respond. If its a de-humanised process its easier to deny.

  • fredbanks

    complacent? we will see about that sir

  • xenophon

    Good for you fred – just remember what you do costs you no more than time .. your barrister sucks money from you and runs the risk of being a willing participant in the clock based game of bureaucracy. More time .. more money – and you give up.

    Try going direct yourself.

    People power – without trying to pull media stunts

  • fredbanks

    how about filing a complaint with the board of psychology ?;)