One that I posted in the Blade version of this, however, a topic of discussion that effects the whole industry. There's a bit more worthwhile discussion from both sides on this topic on the Blade-side which divulges more into the underlying issues.
Since there appears not to be a forum for those in the AAPMBF (the AFAP's Loss of Licence Insurance Fund) to discuss the current proposed changes to the rules I hope that this post can stay and generate appropriate discussion.
The MBF proposes a series of changes to its current rules put for vote by its members - you should have received an email. It's a simple yes or no vote to the whole lot. I ask that members do not disregard this as spam and read the proposed changes as it may seriously effect your insurance policy and potential pay out that you pay lots of premiums into for your protection.
Of note is the proposed change to rule 6(c):
(c) The Fund shall not be liable to make payment of Benefits to a Member where the Member’s Class 1 Medical Certificate has been suspended or Permanently Lost for any disability, in respect of which, in the Trustee’s reasonable opinion, the Member either is currently or would be entitled to receive any periodical or other payments (including, but not limited to workers’ compensation) under state or federal legislation, unless the disability has been specifically accepted by the Trustee.
The proposed change of note is underlined.
Essentially if the vote is passed, the MBF may refuse to pay your insurance pay out if it were deemed you "could" be entitled to, or are receiving another form of payout (workers compo etc) which caused your loss of Class 1 medical. I ask that members seriously consider this change as essentially if you lose your Class One to any work related injury, car crash (covered under CTP) or other accident that could be considered someone else's fault (and hence liability claimable) you may not receive any or all of your insurance pay out that you have paid many $thousands of premiums into!!
This is flawed policy and an easy out for the fund not to pay out your insurance!!! Insurance pay outs should be treated as mutually exclusive pay outs regardless of what other compensation you may receive - that's why you pay premiums!!
Unfortunately the Fund does not have a means for general discussion on these changes (another flaw!!), nor can you vote for individual rule changes (another flaw...). So unless someone from the Fund, or otherwise, can argue a decent counter to this or explain that my interpretation is wrong, I'll be voting NO to all changes and I urge other members to consider this seriously and to spread this discussion on other forums.
1 post • Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest