Skip to main content
All Case Studies
Term Insurance Jayanagar, Bangalore HDFC Life

Term Insurance Death Claim: 1 Crore Recovered via Ombudsman

Insurer rejected death claim citing 'non-disclosure of smoking'. Ombudsman ordered full payout with interest.

Claim Amount
Rs.1,00,00,000
Denial Reason
Material non-disclosure: smoki...
Resolution Time
90 days
Result
Full claim + 9% interest awarded by Ombudsman

Summary

A family's 1 crore term insurance claim was rejected after the policyholder's death. The insurer claimed the deceased had a smoking habit not disclosed in the proposal form 8 years earlier. We proved the medical exam at policy inception showed no nicotine traces, and the insurer's own underwriting accepted the risk. The Ombudsman ordered full payout with 9% interest within 90 days.

How We Solved It

S Situation

Policyholder passed away 8 years after buying a 1 crore term plan. Insurer rejected death claim citing 'smoking habit non-disclosure' based on a single hospital record from 3 years after policy inception. Family had no knowledge of this.

T Task

Prove the non-disclosure was not material at policy inception. Demonstrate the insurer's underwriting accepted the risk. Win at Ombudsman.

A Action

  1. 1. Obtained original medical exam report — cotinine test negative at inception
  2. 2. Got insurer's underwriting file showing standard rates applied (no smoker loading)
  3. 3. Proved the hospital record was from 3 years POST policy inception
  4. 4. Filed Ombudsman complaint with Supreme Court precedent on 'materiality at inception'
  5. 5. Argued insurer cannot re-underwrite after 8 years and claim rejection

R Result

Bangalore Ombudsman awarded full 1 crore + 9% interest from date of claim. The award cited: 'non-disclosure must be material at time of proposal; post-policy habits cannot void the contract'.

Lessons Learned

  • Non-disclosure must be material AT POLICY INCEPTION
  • Insurer's own underwriting decision (standard rates) proves acceptance of risk
  • Post-policy medical records cannot prove pre-policy non-disclosure
  • Ombudsman is binding on insurer, not policyholder
TS

"They said my husband lied about smoking 8 years ago. Hari Sir got the original medical test — no nicotine. The Ombudsman said the insurer accepted him at standard rates. We got 1 crore plus interest."

— They said | Jayanagar, Bangalore

Related Case Studies

Have a similar situation?

Term death claim rejected for non-disclosure? Get a free review of the proposal form and medical exam.

Call Now Free Consultation