Life Health Professional forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Father of Jihadi fighter wants her life insurance

Notify me of new replies via email
Paul Lucas | 27 Apr 2016, 09:56 AM Agree 0
Parent wants policy to be honoured after armed solider was killed fighting for Islamic extremists
  • | 27 Apr 2016, 12:22 PM Agree 0
    Doesn't deserve a nickel, same as any of these other dogs.
  • | 27 Apr 2016, 12:31 PM Agree 0
    Absolutely not. She is a terrorist and should not have any priviledges accorded to law abiding citizens. She made a choice and the family has to accept and live with it.
  • Diane | 27 Apr 2016, 12:31 PM Agree 0
    Dogs are beautiful animals , SOME of these people are scum , the money that the father feels he is entitle to should be given to the families that his daughter kill and destory.
  • | 27 Apr 2016, 12:33 PM Agree 0
    There are not enough details. Was the policy purchased decades ago when she was a child? What is the value of the policy? Who owned the policy? Are her parents the beneficiaries? My opinion....if she was a child when it was purchased by her parents, and the face value is reasonable to pay for her remains to be taken care of... I say yes, the father's request should be honoured. Parents should not be punished for their daughter's actions.
  • | 27 Apr 2016, 12:34 PM Agree 0
    The contract should read that the policy will not pay out if the life insured dies while in the commission of a crime or act of war. as well as the 2yr suicide rule.
    In this case all three would apply,
    It is a crime to be a terrorist, fighting with ISIS is an act of war. and just joining ISIS could arguably be considered suicidal.
  • Victor B Tuba | 27 Apr 2016, 12:40 PM Agree 0
    You have to see what the small print of the policy says and leave personal feeling out of it. if not pay the proceeds into the court's and let the legal beagles settle it. personal feeling should not be part of it.
  • | 27 Apr 2016, 01:10 PM Agree 0
    Value of the policy does not affect the payout. This is a contract. If she left willingly and stood by ISIS, an illegal group and died while fighting - involved in a war, no payout. This seems simple.
  • | 27 Apr 2016, 10:00 PM Agree 0
    It's all about the policy contract. Many policies do not cover death while committing a criminal act.
  • Andre | 28 Apr 2016, 10:22 AM Agree 0
    First, don't most policies have exclusion clauses when involved in an illegal or criminal act as well as war restrictions.
    On the other hand, could it not be argued that this could be a "suicide" or equivalent and if the contract is old enough and in force, would it not then qualify this way.
  • | 02 May 2016, 01:00 PM Agree 0
    no payout to the father should be approved
  • Harry | 02 May 2016, 01:32 PM Agree 0
    Absolutely not, she decided to be a terrorist and kill or maim people. It was totally her decision whether or not she was "brainwashed". If anythinbg is paid out it should be paid out to the innocent victim's loved ones.
  • Dan | 03 May 2016, 12:00 PM Agree 0
    No pay out on this type of claim. Life insurance is for nature and accident death. This person decided to fight with terrorist maybe they should pay the claim.
  • Insurance Advisor | 05 May 2016, 10:06 AM Agree 0
    Who are the people commenting on this page? Certainly not anyone who is actually employed in the insurance business.

    While Australian life insurance contracts may not be the same as they are in Canada, where I work, it's likely they are written in a similar fashion. If the life insurance policy is a non-cancellable, guaranteed contract that has been in force for at least 24 months, this should be a payable claim. I suspect it's also payable in the first 24 months as well. The only way this is not payable is if there is misrepresentation, or if it can be said she committed suicide in the first 24 months. There are no exclusions for acts of war or criminal acts in proper insurance contracts. Those exclusions are for tier 2 or tier 3 products...guaranteed issue or Accidental Death and Dismemberment policies.

    Pay the claim. Perhaps the father can buy a few minutes of peace from all the b.s. and idiots out there that are condemning him for this terrible, unfortunate situation.
  • Mark | 10 May 2016, 01:28 PM Agree 0
    As insurance is a matter of contract, the only issue is whether or not the policy included an exclusion for 'war or acts of war', or 'death caused during the commitment of a crime'. If so, then no payout surely. The issue about her character, the status of the country as a war zone, or her being duped into taking part in terrorism are red herrings; not germane to the question at all.
    If it is deemed the policy should not pay a death benefit then the insurer does not have to forward a cent to anyone, although making a contribution to a terrorist-victim or a terrorist-recruitment prevention organization would be an elegant gesture.
  • Rick | 11 May 2016, 12:27 PM Agree 0
    In Ontario most policies only have 3 reasons the policy would not pay out. Those are the suicide provision, lying on the application (fraud/incontestability clause) and not paying the premiums to keep it in force (lapse). So unless the claim could be denied based on one of these 3 things I don't see how a claim could be denied. Of course it sounds like the policy was issued in Australia and I have no idea what the laws are their or what the policy wording was so its impossible to say. I do however enjoy hearing that one terrorist was killed by another terrorist. That's justice.
Post a reply