Do not any how let agent switch your IP plan with exclusion

I have just concluded a breast cancer claim case to pay out 2 critical illness policy.
My this client few years ago switch out her IncomeShield to company Pshield, and because of breast carcinoma in situ then, was accepted with Special Term to exclude breast cancer treatment.

As an ethical agent, would she be advised to accept to cross over? She  was advised to accept, this is the most ridiculous advice & recommendation. It was switched over and was too late, now the breast cancer treatment is not covered. Her treatment would have been easily covered under Incomeshield if she has remained.

She is fortunate Medishield Life is in place since 1 May 2016 and so can be covered to B2 ward treatment. I have always said the government has done an excellent job to make Medishield Life compulsory.

I have always advised against switching if one has existing condition and I also believe all insurers' IP  plans are more or less covering adequately with slight  differences. Go with the insurer you trust.

I hope the insurance professionals will live up to their ethics. Earning commission is livelihood, but for such a plan is a person's future lifeline. If one cannot meet sales target annually, then just shows this job is not suitable. Seek the interest of others, as one of the ethics is.

Never compromise client's interest for self interest.

IP Standard Plan pro-ration factor

I like to  raise a question - Does pro-ration factor for outpatient treatment in private institution applies to outpatient Kidney Dialysis treatment ?

It is written “One advantage of having an IP is the higher amount claimable for kidney dialysis. The standard B1 plan pays up to $2,750 a month for this while MediShield Life pays only $1,000. This is an important consideration if your income bracket does not qualify you for subsidised treatment.”.

 In the plan itself, there is a pro-ration of 65% when patient goes for outpatient treatment in private institution.

Is the above statement correct?

In Singapore all kidney dialysis are run privately unless it is done in hospital.

The old Plan A & B migrated from CPFB has no pro-ration factor, but most “as charge” today  plan has this pro-ration factor for treatment in private institution. 

I am trying to bring about the point that kidney dialysis the public has no choice to go to a “restructured kidney dialysis’ centre unless is done as inpatient in restructured hospital.

The pro-ration factor will not help people who are caught in kidney dialysis needs. I was told pro-ration will apply unless is done at VWO centres like NKF or KDF but is subject to means test.

If I am correct on this pro-ration for kidney dialysis unless there are alternatives, pro-ration factor should not apply for outpatient kidney dialysis.