Never buy Insurance Policy

My family went up to the prudential office to lodge a complain and to enquire as to why the company isn't giving the full sum as promised on the contract. The company dismissed my dad with a convenient bullshit excuse " our company isn't earning much so that's the sum you'll have ".

Is this ethically right? What's the point for anyone to save with prudential if you're going to make a loss in the end after 20 years? That money could've been many times more if my dad invested in other financial instruments and inflation.

Is there any case if we were to sue them? My parents are just Hawkers, I don't understand why you've to make the old generation suffer so much

-----------

Update: it's an endowment plan.

Update2 : there has been no withdrawal made and payment has been made regularly since 1994. The agent who sold this policy to my dad is no longer in prudential so it's more troublesome too. I've also attached another pic regarding the loss of $ (which I've no idea what it is)

Update3: Hi there! Didn't expect to receive so much help from everyone. I've already sent the documentations to my friends who're from diff insurance agencies and they're looking into it to see if they're able to help 😊 I've also translated the knowledge I've learnt from everyone to my dad but we'll have to wait till Monday to see how the situation unfolds (I was told that someone from prudential will be contacting us, we don't know how it'll go but we'll see).

For those who're not providing any useful advice at all and is attacking my dad and I, please know that none of us expected this to happen. The term insurance is a very new concept to him in the 90s. Just because you're literate now doesn't mean that everyone is back then in the 90s. Your parents could've bought similiar policies for their retirement plan back then, and they could've ended up in a similiar fate if they've an unethical agent whose mind is prob only on their KPI, serving them.

Once again, thanks everyone for your advice and concern regarding the situation and I really appreciate it. Have a great weekend ahead!

Update4 08/04: Last update till Monday. I've uploaded extra pics regarding the documentation. Thanks to all of you, I was able to understand more about insurances, riders, guaranteed sum etc. I was able to educate my dad on that and advice him accordingly as to what I've been told. So here's his question, why did the policy schedule (pic1) indicate that he would be receiving $42k based on the contract he has in the 90s even though the assured sum is 20k? There has been no signs of the word " projected " anywhere in the policy schedule which is pretty misleading imo.

----------

Update5 10/04: A rep from pru contacted my dad and has explained the policy as whole, but there was still no explanation regarding the letter which states the 42k.

2) My dad told her what went down on his visit to Prudential Singapore's customer service during feb. Basically after the situation which was explained on this post (my dad being dismissed etc), he requested to see a manager, but was denied. Customer service then told us to go ahead with complaining.

3) He was informed that the company has no records of the first letter which I've uploaded and asked my dad if there's a pru logo on it/envelope accompanying it (are you guys insinuating anything?). Just so all of you know, the first letter which accompanied the policy was sent in this gold coloured envelope during the year of purchase (wow this paper is as old as I am).

4) I've emailed the documents WITH LOGO to the pru rep as of 11am, she told my dad that she will be visiting him tomorrow. Also I've uploaded the documents with logo here too.

Update6 12/04 - Update from my parents:

Yesterday, 3 prudential representatives came to my house to explain the policy to my parents and to understand the entire situation. As the company has no records of the documentation regarding the policy, they took pictures of it and brought it back for investigation.

The reps also told my dad that the policy schedule was done by agent back then and not by the company. Regardless of whether it's done up by the company or the agent, the fact that the policy was from Prudential, the company should be accountable for it. After all, It has their prudential logo and such mistake is their internal matters.
Fortunately, the reps have also agreed that the company has responsibility regarding this issue too.

My dad then explained to them that he bought the policy back then in the 90s bcuz of the 42k that the agent promised and the written policy schedule (as shown in the pic, there was no indication that it's a projected sum) and that he wouldn't have bought it if it was otherwise.

The reps then told him that they'll be investigating the matter and will be contacting him again next Wednesday.

(My dad also wanted me to convey that he has been honest throughout this whole episode and there's nothing to hide.)

Post closed: " I will not be making any further comments on this issue and this post is closed "
http://www.tnp.sg/news/singapore/couple-wins-16m-lawsuit-against-aia-bogus-insurance-policy?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook#link_time=1514599368