Stronger Legal Institutions

Oct 13, 2025 by pynkocean.com 108 views

The Application of the Principle of Good Faith in Terms of the Obligation to Notify the Medical History that Causes the Rejection of the Payment of Customer Life Insurance Claims (Study of the Decision of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency Sukabumi Regency Number: 010/G/BPSK.Kabsi/X/2021)

Introduction

The principle of good faith is a fundamental concept in every insurance agreement, requiring policyholders to provide honest and accurate information about their conditions, including medical history. In practice, there are still many violations that occur, where policyholders do not reveal important facts regarding their health history. This article aims to discuss the application of good faith principles in the obligation to notify the medical history, using the case study of the Sukabumi Regency Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK) decision with number 010/G/BPSK.Kabsi/X/2021.

The Importance of Good Faith in Insurance Agreements

The principle of good faith is an essential foundation in every insurance agreement. It requires policyholders to provide honest and accurate information about their conditions, including medical history. This principle is crucial in ensuring that insurance companies can assess the risks involved in providing coverage to policyholders. In the context of Indonesian law, there are provisions in Article 249 and Article 276 of the Criminal Code that strengthen the position of insurance companies in limiting their responsibilities if there are violations of the principles of good faith.

The Obligation to Notify the Medical History

The obligation to notify the medical history is a critical aspect of the insurance agreement. Policyholders are required to disclose any pre-existing medical conditions or health issues that may affect their ability to pay premiums or claim benefits. Failure to disclose this information can result in the rejection of claims by insurance companies. In the case of the Sukabumi Regency BPSK decision, the policyholder did not provide complete information about his medical history, which resulted in the rejection of claims by insurance companies.

The Limitation of Insurance Company Responsibility

Provisions in Insurance Policy No. BLPM9172089237 also state that the insurance company has the right to limit its responsibilities if there is a violation of the principle of good faith. This creates a dilemma where the heirs, although they are entitled to claims, must face the possibility of rejection due to errors or negligence of information provided by previous policyholders. This shows the need for education for the public regarding the importance of disclosing health information honestly when dealing with insurance companies.

The Role of BPSK in Resolving Disputes

From the BPSK perspective, an analysis of their authority in handling insurance claim disputes shows that they do not have the authority to resolve this case. This is in line with the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, which confirms that the dispute over insurance claims involving violations of the principles of good faith is outside the realm of resolution by BPSK. Previous cases, such as No. 757/PDT.Sus-BPSK/2016 and No. 472 K/PDT SUS-BPSK/2014, show the same pattern, where BPSK cannot take action on the basis of the insurance claim case.

The Need for Stronger Legal Institutions

The case of Sukabumi Regency BPSK decision regarding the rejection of life insurance claim payments shows the complexity associated with the application of good faith principles in insurance. Violations of the obligation to notify the medical history can cause losses for heirs. This emphasizes the importance of a better understanding by the policyholder about their obligations in the insurance process, as well as the limits of the responsibility of the insurance company. The limited authority of BPSK in resolving insurance claim disputes also highlights the need for stronger legal institutions to protect consumer rights in dealing with insurance companies.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the application of good faith principles in the obligation to notify the medical history is a critical aspect of the insurance agreement. Violations of this obligation can result in the rejection of claims by insurance companies, causing losses for heirs. The case of Sukabumi Regency BPSK decision highlights the need for education for the public regarding the importance of disclosing health information honestly when dealing with insurance companies. Furthermore, the limited authority of BPSK in resolving insurance claim disputes emphasizes the need for stronger legal institutions to protect consumer rights in dealing with insurance companies.

Recommendations

Based on the analysis of the case study, the following recommendations are made:

Education and Awareness: Insurance companies and BPSK should conduct education and awareness programs to inform policyholders about the importance of disclosing health information honestly when dealing with insurance companies.
Clear Communication: Insurance companies should provide clear communication to policyholders about their obligations in the insurance process, including the need to disclose medical history.
Stronger Legal Institutions: The government should establish stronger legal institutions to protect consumer rights in dealing with insurance companies.
Improved Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: BPSK and other dispute resolution mechanisms should be improved to provide more effective and efficient resolution of insurance claim disputes.

By implementing these recommendations, the application of good faith principles in the obligation to notify the medical history can be improved, reducing the risk of rejection of claims by insurance companies and protecting the rights of policyholders and their heirs.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) about the Application of Good Faith Principles in the Obligation to Notify the Medical History

Q: What is the principle of good faith in the context of insurance agreements?

A: The principle of good faith is an essential foundation in every insurance agreement, requiring policyholders to provide honest and accurate information about their conditions, including medical history.

Q: Why is it important to disclose medical history when applying for insurance?

A: Disclosing medical history is crucial in ensuring that insurance companies can assess the risks involved in providing coverage to policyholders. Failure to disclose this information can result in the rejection of claims by insurance companies.

Q: What are the consequences of not disclosing medical history when applying for insurance?

A: Not disclosing medical history can result in the rejection of claims by insurance companies, causing losses for heirs. In some cases, insurance companies may also limit their responsibilities if there is a violation of the principle of good faith.

Q: What is the role of BPSK in resolving disputes related to insurance claims?

A: BPSK has limited authority in resolving insurance claim disputes, particularly those involving violations of the principles of good faith. In such cases, BPSK may not be able to take action on the basis of the insurance claim case.

Q: What are the limitations of BPSK's authority in resolving insurance claim disputes?

A: BPSK's authority is limited by the Jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, which confirms that the dispute over insurance claims involving violations of the principles of good faith is outside the realm of resolution by BPSK.

Q: What are the recommendations for improving the application of good faith principles in the obligation to notify the medical history?

A: The following recommendations are made:

Education and Awareness: Insurance companies and BPSK should conduct education and awareness programs to inform policyholders about the importance of disclosing health information honestly when dealing with insurance companies.
Clear Communication: Insurance companies should provide clear communication to policyholders about their obligations in the insurance process, including the need to disclose medical history.
Stronger Legal Institutions: The government should establish stronger legal institutions to protect consumer rights in dealing with insurance companies.
Improved Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: BPSK and other dispute resolution mechanisms should be improved to provide more effective and efficient resolution of insurance claim disputes.

Q: How can policyholders ensure that they are complying with the principle of good faith when applying for insurance?

A: Policyholders can ensure that they are complying with the principle of good faith by:

Providing accurate and complete information: Policyholders should provide accurate and complete information about their medical history when applying for insurance.
Disclosing pre-existing medical conditions: Policyholders should disclose any pre-existing medical conditions or health issues that may affect their ability to pay premiums or claim benefits.
Seeking advice from insurance professionals: Policyholders should seek advice from insurance professionals to ensure that they understand their obligations in the insurance process.

Q: What are the benefits of complying with the principle of good faith when applying for insurance?

A: Complying with the principle of good faith when applying for insurance can result in:

Faster claim processing: Compliant policyholders may experience faster claim processing and reduced administrative costs.
Increased trust: Compliant policyholders may build trust with insurance companies, leading to better relationships and more favorable terms.
Reduced risk: Compliant policyholders may reduce the risk of claim rejection and associated losses.

By understanding the importance of good faith principles in the obligation to notify the medical history, policyholders can ensure that they are complying with their obligations and protecting their rights in the insurance process.