Latest news with #CentralVigilanceCommission
Mint
25-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
Rejected insurance claims? An in-house ombudsman could help
We buy insurance to protect our finances against unforeseen life events such as hospitalisation or a death in the family. However, it's a reality that insurers reject claims. Policyholders have the option to escalate the issue to the insurance ombudsman or approach consumer courts, which can be both expensive and long-drawn. To ensure faster resolution, the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI) has proposed that insurers appoint an internal ombudsman who will look into complaints that have not been addressed within 30 days. Industry stakeholders have until 17 August to send their comments and suggestions on the proposal to the regulator. 'The objective of the insurance company's in-house mediation or ombudsman is to bring a prompt redressal mechanism in case of a dispute,' said Bejon Misra, a consumer policy expert and former member of IRDAI's insurance ombudsman advisory committee. The internal ombudsman will be a 'neutral, unbiased and credible person of repute, reporting to the board', Misra said. Indian banks already follow this process, appointing an independent in-house authority to review and examine customer complaints. 'The system already exists in banks and is working satisfactorily. That said, the concept is lofty and deserves the required attention and implementation,' said R.M. Singh, a former insurance ombudsman of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh. However, given that all insurers already have an internal grievance redressal officer (GRO) to handle and resolve customer complaints, how different will the role of an internal ombudsman be? If an insurance company rejects your claim, you have to follow a process to escalate the issue. The first step is to write to the insurer's grievance redressal officer, who is expected to work independently and hear both sides. Industry experts, however, say GROs are not influential enough to be unbiased in their decisions. 'The grievance department in most of the companies is weak, compliant to the management's wishes, and manned by junior level officers whose recommendations are taken lightly,' said Singh. Also, such junior officers often do not have the experience and knowledge to deal with grievances in an appropriate manner, he added. An internal ombudsman, on the other hand, will hold independent charge and be answerable to the insurer's board and not to the managing director or chief executive officer. 'An independent internal ombudsman's decision will be binding on the company,' said Singh. However, he added that for an in-house ombudsman to be impartial 'his remuneration should be fair, satisfactory, and lucrative so that he does not get enchanted by market forces/operators'. 'Secondly, the reporting of the internal ombudsman should be to IRDAI, just like chief vigilance officers report to the Central Vigilance Commission. The internal ombudsman can make presentations to the CEO and the board, but should not be held accountable by these authorities in order to maintain impartiality and prioritise policyholders' interest," Singh added . . There are 17 insurance ombudsman offices in the country, according to the 2023-24 annual report of the Council of Insurance Ombudsman. But these offices are typically swamped with policyholder complaints. In FY24, they received 52,575 complaints, and had 4,332 complaints outstanding from the previous year. Of these, 49,705 complaints were resolved. 'Having an internal ombudsman will de-clog the grievance numbers (pending) with the independent ombudsman offices,' said Singh. Shilpa Arora, co-founder, Insurance Samadhan, agreed. 'Policyholders have to wait for a long time to get a hearing date from the ombudsman. The delays are due to an overload on the ombudsman body. Complaints are getting resolved after over a year at some locations. We see cancer claims being rejected and policyholders have to fight for the entire year along with managing chemotherapy sessions,' Arora said. Misra, the former member of IRDAI's insurance ombudsman advisory committee, said it was time to do away with ombudsman offices. 'All employees in ombudsman offices are persons on deputation from life and non-life insurance companies. An in-house mediation facility by appointing a person of repute would be more efficient and effective, but the process has to be transparent,' Misra said. If internal ombudsman regulations get implemented, all insurers will appoint one or multiple in-house ombudsman. Policyholders can write to them if they don't hear from the insurance company within 30 days of filing a complaint. If the insurer has already rejected your claim, you can directly reach out to the internal ombudsman. The ombudsman will be required to record a 'reasoned decision' in each case, which shall be binding on the insurer. If you are aggrieved by the internal ombudsman's decision, after 30 days you can appeal to the external insurance ombudsman.
Time of India
22-05-2025
- Business
- Time of India
Uniform disciplinary action format at PSBs on the cards
State-run banks plan to adopt a unified format and standard operating procedure (SOP) for any disciplinary action against their employees, said people familiar with the development. A working group set up by banks is firming up guidelines in this regard and the new format could come into effect in June, they said. "Banks have shared the best practices followed by them in disciplinary processes and it has been decided that a uniform process be adopted across public sector banks (PSBs), the contours of which are being finalised," said one bank executive, who did not wish to be identified. Currently, all PSBs follow the Central Vigilance Commission manual, but each has its own disciplinary process along with timelines in certain cases. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Book Your Daily Profit By 11 AM With This Superclass By Mr. Bala TradeWise Learn More Banks will also incorporate the suggestions made by an internal committee led by a former Central Bureau of Investigation special director DC Jain on strategies and frameworks for dealing with cases against lenders under the Prevention of Corruption Act . Live Events "A standard format will bring uniformity and ensure that any disciplinary action is not random or prejudiced because the management was biased," another executive said on condition of anonymity, adding that the boards of the respective banks will approve the final guidelines. In the past, banks have been lobbying for more protection and immunity for commercial decisions taken by their employees.
Hindustan Times
07-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Centre extends tenure of CBI director by 1 year
The government has extended the tenure of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) director Praveen Sood by a year, an order from the appointments committee of cabinet (ACC) said on Wednesday. The government has extended the tenure of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) director Praveen Sood by a year (PTI) The decision for the extension was taken at the meeting on Monday after a high-powered committee, comprising Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi failed to reach a consensus. 'The appointments committee of the cabinet, based on the recommendations of the committee, has approved the extension in tenure of Praveen Sood, as director CBI for a period of one year beyond April 24, 2025,' the order issued on Wednesday said. The extension is a departure from norm, as the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Act mandates a fixed tenure of two-years for directors of CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED). In November 2021, the government brought in an ordinance to amend the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) Act as well as the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act to empower it to give three one-year extensions to ED chiefs and the CBI directors if it so desires. The ordinance was subsequently passed by Parliament a month later. Previously, the ordinance was used to give three back-to-back extensions to former ED director Sanjay Kumar Mishra. Sood, a 1986-batch Indian Police Service (IPS) officer of the Karnataka cadre, was appointed as 34th director of CBI on May 25, 2023. Before his CBI stint, Sood was the director general of police (DGP) in Karnataka. During his tenure, CBI has successfully investigated and finalized several sensitive cases including NEET-UG paper leak, RG Kar hospital rape and murder, cash-for-jobs irregularities involving former railways minister Lalu Prasad Yadav and his family, Delhi excise policy 2021-22 related irregularities in which former chief minister Arvind Kejriwal and deputy CM Manish Sisodia were arrested. Under Sood, the agency also filed a record number of closure reports, officials said. For instance, in 2024, CBI filed closure report in at least 174 cases for lack of evidence. Prior to 2024, CBI's closure reports ranged between 30 and 60 cases every year, including 62 in 2023 and 32 in 2022. Some prominent cases closed last year include a 2017 probe against Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader Praful Patel (now with NCP-SP) for alleged irregularities in the leasing of aircraft by National Aviation Corporation of India Ltd (NACIL); a 2017 probe against former Union environment minister Jayanthi Natarajan over diversion of forest land for a steel plant in Jharkhand; a 2017 case against NDTV founders Prannoy and Radhika Roy for allegedly causing a loss of ₹ 48 crore to ICICI Bank; and a 2022 case of betting in Indian Premier League's 2019 season. 'The director (Sood) directed all units of the agency last year to scavenge the cases that needed winding up and finalise them at the earliest — by either filing charge sheet(s) or closure report(s). This resulted in the agency disposing of a record 1,467 cases (1,293 charge sheets and 174 closure reports) in 2024,' said an officer, who asked not to be named. Known for his hands-on approach, Sood had supervised investigation of high-profile cases involving high net-worth individuals and matters having inter-state and international ramifications.
