ICICI Prudential Lacks PRUDENCE: Fleecing of customers continues UNABATED
As we know Corporate Governance is all about Rules & Regulations, about
vigilance & compliance, about transparent & consistent application of rules,
and to top it, is about Accountability & systematic controls. But, at times
Greed or perhaps the lax, pliable, in-house monitoring system, lack of
accountability factor spur people to collude, exploit the trust of
unsuspecting investors.

Mine is an apt case to illustrate this. While clinching above said policy,
every rule, every guidance as has been defined, inserted, embedded in
the application
form, as the law expects them to abide by, was violated & circumvented. For
the last 16months, I have gone through a frustrating anger, pain. It was
puzzling that though the violations were visible all over the application
form, were easily verifiable, were pointedly told about, serious as they
were, the policy, proposal should never have crossed the point of POLICY
ORIGINATION. But, not only the underwriting rules were compromised, even the
persons accountable for enforcing/ ensuring/ monitoring compliance of rules
aided & abetted the violations, the crime instead of attending to the
complaint, they indulged in lies, half truths, denials to gloss over it.

I have called it a policy of deceit, policy of corporate thuggy because it
has violated the very basics, things that go in the making of a contract,
things like rules & regulations, guidelines, abiding condition which are
unambiguous, sacrosanct, inviolable, which are mentioned there in black &
white in the application form.

1. Like in the important guidelines section of the application/ proposal
form, it has been stated that you cannot apply for a Life Product and a
Pension Product on the same form. Inference is obvious, the two products are
considered as being different in character, as their benefits, their
implications being different, they will need different kind of orientation,
different kind of input/ output analysis. Hence was the GUIDELINE to ensure/
protect investors interest.
But here only one form, form no. - 09675272 was filled and that too for
Premier Life Gold - Insurance product, whereas, the final product, was Life
Time Super Pension.
WHERE IS THE FORM THAT SHOULD HAVE GONE IN THE MAKING OF THIS PRODUCT?

2. Likewise in the DECLARATION section, a clause is there & I quote, which
declares that "In case of any misstatement or suppression of MATERIAL
INFORMATION, the company has the right to REPUDIATE the claim under the
policy". In CONTINUATION, it also goes onto declare, in a HIGHLIGHTED manner
that "the POLICY shall become VOID, where it is found that POLICY was issued
on the basis of fake/ tempered documents."
Tempering/ Misstatement of any kind, any type, was considered unacceptable,
illegal, punishable by the company and SO is treated by our law.In the light
of above DECLARATION, how can the company gloss over, condone the tempering
done by their own, ignored by their own.

3. In the said form no. - 09675272 in the column no. 19 had stated my annual
income as Rs.2,000,00 whereas, as informed by their Customr Relation
Manager, it was stated as Rs.4,000,00 as per their underwriting process.
WHO TEMPERED IT? That implies, tempering being an act, which is punishable,
an act which renders the whole process NULL, the policy is VOID.
Who did the tempering OR why it was done for this to understand you need not
be SHERLOCK HOLMES. When you sell an insurance policy with sum assured
Rs.15,000,00 with annual premium Rs.3,000,00; all this to a 59yr old man
whose annual income is Rs.2,000,00, the whole policy becomes questionable on
adequacy, suitability, sustainability norms. To cover up/ justify the same
it was tempered, made to appear Rs.4,000,00. No amount of reasoning, logic
could attribute this tempering to me, to the investor. That amount when you
rectify/amend something, authenticate it by countersigning it, the
rectified/ amended thing does not look patch work/ eye wash. That apart, to
unmask this mystery, the motive, the beneficiary factor too can help to
understand what lies between the lines.

4. In the same declaration, it has also been highlighted & I quote "I also
certify that I have read & understood the BENEFIT ILLUSTRATION as published
by the company that were handed over to me ALONG WITH this application form
.."
It simply implies that the BENEFITS ILLUSTRATION + APPLICATION FORM together
complete the COMPLIANCE conditions, complete the POLICY contract.
Now where is the CONTEXTUAL/ RELEVANT APPLICATION FORM? The form being so
important, so essential, why was it given a go-by, bypassed?
I have termed the whole thing as CORPORATE THUGGY, termed it as TOTAL
COLLAPSE of corporate governance because I have not seen any semblance for
adhering to declared rules, propriety. Not only the all visible, verifiable
violations were ignored, rather aided & abetted BUT even simple, noticeable
breaches were justified.

5. Like in the application form, it was stated that, "No person shall allow
or offer to allow either DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY, as an inducement..." BUT
the very fact is, that not only the cheque was issued BUT it bounced on
presentation! When this was brought to the notice of your executives, it was
termed as a PERSONAL transaction, beyond the company's jurisdiction.

Now that the violations, conspiracy, crime has been conclusively proved,
that the POLICY should not have happened has been proved, that it was VOID
of its own has been proved, holding on, retaining my money paid as the first
premium, was a huge farce, a serious fraud.

I will like my money to be returned back duely alongwith the interest as
well as the sweat equity, which I have spent in these 16+ months. I have all
the relevant proofs to help me prove the same in the court of law.

Can the forum provide me with a course of action from hereon. A legal
reference is also welcome.

Regards,

Vijay Kumar Manroa
(+91 9891270093)