On May 12, VietNamNet published an article “Customer accuses bank employee of luring her into buying insurance with “higher interest than savings””, reflecting on Ms. Nguyen Thi Bich Dao (born in 1983, Ha Dong, Hanoi) signing a contract to participate in Prudential’s “Pru-Flexible Investment” insurance package through the consultation of an employee of the International Commercial Joint Stock Bank (VIB) Xa La Branch.
The contract took effect from March 2020 with a fee of 30 million VND/year. By October 2022, after a series of controversies related to insurance contracts sold through banks, Ms. Dao reviewed the contract and said that the content of the contract was different from what she had been advised before. She did not receive a higher interest rate than savings as the consultant had promised.
After submitting the complaint, Ms. Dao has worked with the bank twice but so far the insurance contract has not been terminated as she requested.
Responding to the above case, the International Commercial Joint Stock Bank said that in order to have an objective assessment of the customer's feedback, the bank has compared, investigated, and verified internally along with explanations from related personnel.
The representative of the International Bank said that Ms. Dao's complaint about "consultants abusing trust, being dishonest, or customers not being properly advised about insurance products" was not well-founded.
Accordingly, the bank has requested Ms. Dao to provide additional valid evidence demonstrating the employee's violations. However, up to now, the bank has not received any evidence from the customer to consider support.
The bank also denied the information that it proposed to support customers with 15 million VND, equivalent to half a year of insurance premiums if they cancel their contracts. This information is not the bank's official opinion.
Regarding the fact that the consultant admitted to advising the customer that the insurance package had a higher interest rate than the savings account (in the presence of two colleagues), the bank said that during the consultation process as well as during the meetings between the two parties on March 4, March 11, and March 27, they did not confirm with the customer that the interest rate of the insurance contract was higher than the savings account interest rate.
Consultants and staff have clarified and explained many times that the nature of the interest rate on investment funds in the insurance contract that customers participate in will depend on the market situation and the actual business results of that investment fund on an annual basis.
Regarding the customer's request to terminate the insurance contract and refund the 3-year insurance premium paid, the bank said that there was no basis to determine the consultant's violation, so the customer did not fall into one of the termination cases according to Article 23 of the Law on Insurance Business, the bank had no basis to terminate the insurance contract and refund the insurance premium as requested by the customer.
In response to the above responses from the bank, Ms. Nguyen Thi Bich Dao expressed her indignation.
She said she provided additional evidence to prove that the bank's approval process was "problematic" such as: The insurance contract had the wrong customer address and incorrect marital status.
Regarding the proposal to "support 15 million VND" for customers, Ms. Dao confirmed that this was the proposal from the leader of Xa La branch, International Bank, during the second working session.
“Because I trusted her, I did not record the time the bank staff gave advice. During a recent meeting, I recorded Ms. Huong (bank staff - PV) admitting that there was this conversation (about consulting on higher interest rates than savings deposits - PV). I knew there would be a denial, so I determined from the beginning that the issue was not about getting the money back. I just wanted to show (point out) how the bank denied the incident,” said Ms. Dao.
Source
Comment (0)