A Humanitarian Gesture Needed - Please Read

Cara, Thank you again for explaining to the Peanut Gallery. Look if you don't want to help, that is your prerogative. But to turn this thread into a debate about ethics or to keep putting false information out there regarding the legalities of inclusion on a BUPA scheme just defeats the purpose of offering any help to the OP. So get off your soapboxes and start another thread where you can debate till your heart's content. As for this thread, there are people that have given quite a lot of valuable information about the BUPA scheme. Information that clears up the legality of the issue AND can possibly help the OP and make a significant impact on her life. I for one, am in a position to help - not to judge. Everyone just helped the lovely couple with the lost dog and/or wished them well in their search to a happy ending. This could be another happy ending - a fellow human gets a new lease on life by getting the health care they desperately need. If you want to show some compassion and wish the OP well, then by all means. If you are in a position to help the OP, by all means please do. However, if your comments are not constructive, please just do your trolling elsewhere. We are here to support and assist a person that needs help and don't need that point to get lost in the thread.

I don't think it's the pre-existing condition that posters are objecting to but the idea of someone joining a company's insurance cover when they don't actually work for that company or have any connection to it... Personally, if it's legal and someone is willing to oblige I don't see what the problem is... And what do ya know? We agree on something! I'm up for that cup of joe anytime you can break free this week:) since I found out i'm not who you think I am I thought you'd change your mind !! lol Birthday party panics this week but next week name your weapon !! lol

Cara - well said! You saved me responding lol.

As I have already stated, I have administered insurance schemes for company's here; please note it is 100% NOT insurance fraud to have people on the scheme who are not employed by the company. This is purely down to the policy and discretion of each company. Whilst the majority of employers prefer to only have employees and their dependants, it is certainly not a legal pre-requisite. It is also 100% not fraud for a medical insurer to cover pre exisiting conditions if the scheme is set up as MEDICAL HISTORY DISREGARDED. I think the OP is asking for assistance in view of some terrible circumstances (that any of us could be unfortunate enough to find ourselves in) and posters should not make comments about fraud, crime etc when they do not know this to be fact. If you can't help or disagree with the request, please refrain from making statements about being unethical/fraud or "'risky to any good Samaritan"' which is just not the case. Such statements could really be detrimental to a genuine person who may be willing to help. All that they are guilty of asking is if a company would be willing to perhaps ''bend their rules'' for them as a humanatrian gesture? It's a big ASK but certainly does not constitute fraud or a crime and as I said it is certainly in line with policies that I have administered in the past. The OP also mentioned that the company could hold the card so please note that no claims can actually be made. There is therefore no risk to the company in view of increased premiums. Someone (cheeky monkey) earlier mentioned that their insurance provided allowed them to continue with the scheme in their own name after DH left his company. Which insurance company was that? Does anyone know if there are other insurance providers out there apart from BUPA who would allow this? Maybe there are some other options as well? I think we could all learn something from this situation. Perhaps those of you who are cynical, critical or judgemental should investigate if your company medical insurance would allow you to continue with your insurance cover in your own name if God forbid, you get seriously ill and you or DH's employment was unfairly terminated during serious illness. None of us knows what's around the corner for any of us so perhaps we should just take a moment to think how you would feel if you were thrown into such circumstances. This sadly also happened to a friend of mine so I understand what the OP is going through. I really wish I could help and I hope somone one here might be able to.

because it's wrong - you are abusing a system for personal gain. The same way that it's wrong for expats to use the NHS. If people want to help, start a fund to cover the ladies medical expenses but this is just wrong.

I do not understand why so many people have a problem with this thread?!?! It has been stated that it is not insurance fraud, that it IS within BUPA regulations, that claims will not be made as the card will be held by the company etc....Why can people not just accept that and either move on or do something positive to try to help the OP? Why is there so often such a negative, shoot down attitude on this forum? Someone in a desperate situation is asking for help..... is that SO bad? Can we not just try to help rather than criticise and be so negative?! This is someones health we are talking about - not something trivial!

So, the OP's insurance broker AND Hendy AND Cara have all decided to make this procedure up and the latter two to illustrate how it would work from their own experience, just for the heck of it?

I shall await RuthM's verdict on this. I am sure her legal man will know more. Personally, I am sure that there is a clause somewhere, I just cannot think that Bupa would allow this. It defeats all purposes.

Regardless of anyone's good intentions, this is insurance fraud, pure and simple - and highly risky for any good Samaritan who goes along with it. Frankly, I'm surprised admin has let this thread go on for as long as it has given that the OP is openly asking other posters to commit a crime. But it has been stated many times that BUPA allows this and that this is not insurance fraud. Could the OP contact BUPA directly and see what they say?

I don't think it's the pre-existing condition that posters are objecting to but the idea of someone joining a company's insurance cover when they don't actually work for that company or have any connection to it... Personally, if it's legal and someone is willing to oblige I don't see what the problem is... And what do ya know? We agree on something! I'm up for that cup of joe anytime you can break free this week:)

Thanks so much to everyone for reading this and for your comments and Hendy and Cara, thank you SO much for confirming my original post. WW, I am deeply grateful for any efforts and inquiries you make - you just have no idea how much of a difference this could make to my future! I am wracked with worry over this, which is obviously not helping my current treatment. I re-confirm that NO claims would be made, the company can hold the membership card for peace of mind and all premium would be covered by myself personally so the company would incur no extra cost. In the event that your DH could possibly help, my email address is in the original post. With regards to the other suggestions, in an ideal world, once I had finished my treatment, I could look for a new job with a BUPA scheme but realistically, what are the chances of finding my specific role and with a company that provides BUPA? Very slim in my opinion. It is hard to believe but this route is in no way fraudulent and is completely within the rules and regulations of BUPA schemes. It seems to be my only way out of a desperate situation. We have looked into all possibilities but this seems to be the only way I can obtain cover unfortunately. So again, if anyone out there were to be in a position to help me on this, I would be eternally grateful. Unfortunately, many of us here ARE on company schemes and my situation is a prime example of how this can go drastically wrong. Thanks again ladies, hopefuldxb edited by hopefuldxb3 on 17/05/2013

I've read a lot of the responses to this thread but not all, so perhaps this has been mentioned already but I dont really understand why people are getting so soap boxy about the ethics regarding a pre-existing condition. realistically, this is no different to joining a group policy when already pregnant, except with pregnancy the ins company is guaranteed to have to pay out an absolute minimum of about AED11k, and usually a considerable amount more, and all within the first year of being on the policy. I know for certain that when joining a group policy with almost any ins company, so long as there are enough people in the group, you are automatically covered for pre-existing conditions, of which pregnancy is included, aswell as other long term pre-existing health issues. So am i missing something here? As others have said, if its legal, and within the terms and conditions for BUPA's policy, who are we to criticize and make an issue where there really isnt one. Some one is in an awful situation and needs help. If it isnt going to be of detriment to anyone else, why shouldn't people help if in a position to do so. It could so easily be any one of us. OP, unfortunately im not in a position to be able to offer help. If i was, I would. I really hope your problem gets solved soon. All the best! xx edited by LMAO-DXB on 19/05/2013 I don't think it's the pre-existing condition that posters are objecting to but the idea of someone joining a company's insurance cover when they don't actually work for that company or have any connection to it... Personally, if it's legal and someone is willing to oblige I don't see what the problem is...

I agree with simpleasabc - if the insurance company was not prepared to do this, they would include pre-existing condition questionnaires for all who avail of their health scheme. If they are not asking for those details, how is it unethical? Also, as the OP noted below, they will not even claim on the insurance cover while on the group scheme which is 3 years. So how is this unethical??? Apart from the fact that this could change and even SAVE someone's life! Where would your ethics stand on that one, Splinters? If you had the chance to save someone's life, would you refuse on the grounds of what you consider ethical? edited by Mmmmmm on 19/05/2013 I believe the OP stated they would NOT take custody of the insurance card, hence the level of comfort to the company about the no claims statement. Good luck in getting things sorted OP, hope something will work out. Pretty big assumption that some random person from a random internet chat board would not claim on an insurance cover that they'd been given while they have admitted they have a serious illness for three years. You all are a lot more trusting than I've ever been!

I've read a lot of the responses to this thread but not all, so perhaps this has been mentioned already but I dont really understand why people are getting so soap boxy about the ethics regarding a pre-existing condition. realistically, this is no different to joining a group policy when already pregnant, except with pregnancy the ins company is guaranteed to have to pay out an absolute minimum of about AED11k, and usually a considerable amount more, and all within the first year of being on the policy. I know for certain that when joining a group policy with almost any ins company, so long as there are enough people in the group, you are automatically covered for pre-existing conditions, of which pregnancy is included, aswell as other long term pre-existing health issues. So am i missing something here? As others have said, if its legal, and within the terms and conditions for BUPA's policy, who are we to criticize and make an issue where there really isnt one. Some one is in an awful situation and needs help. If it isnt going to be of detriment to anyone else, why shouldn't people help if in a position to do so. It could so easily be any one of us. OP, unfortunately im not in a position to be able to offer help. If i was, I would. I really hope your problem gets solved soon. All the best! xx <em>edited by LMAO-DXB on 19/05/2013</em>

Also, as the OP noted below, they will not even claim on the insurance cover while on the group scheme which is 3 years. So how is this unethical??? Apart from the fact that this could change and even SAVE someone's life! Where would your ethics stand on that one, Splinters? If you had the chance to save someone's life, would you refuse on the grounds of what you consider ethical? edited by Mmmmmm on 19/05/2013 [b'>Pretty big assumption that some random person from a random internet chat board would not claim on an insurance cover that they'd been given while they have admitted they have a serious illness for three years. You all are a lot more trusting than I've ever been![/b'> Yes, I can't say that I would take that as guaranteed when making my decision about this. I would be surprised if there wasn't a claim, and would take it into account.

If BUPA say they allow it, who are you to argue about the ethics? if you want to take your ethical influence from an insurance company; go ahead.... personally i find this unethical. The whole idea is to help someone who is in trouble and asking for help. That is where I take my ethics from. Me too. Any of us could be in this situation and provided it was all legal and above board i would help where i could.

I agree with simpleasabc - if the insurance company was not prepared to do this, they would include pre-existing condition questionnaires for all who avail of their health scheme. If they are not asking for those details, how is it unethical? Also, as the OP noted below, they will not even claim on the insurance cover while on the group scheme which is 3 years. So how is this unethical??? Apart from the fact that this could change and even SAVE someone's life! Where would your ethics stand on that one, Splinters? If you had the chance to save someone's life, would you refuse on the grounds of what you consider ethical? <em>edited by Mmmmmm on 19/05/2013</em>

If BUPA say they allow it, who are you to argue about the ethics? if you want to take your ethical influence from an insurance company; go ahead.... personally i find this unethical. The whole idea is to help someone who is in trouble and asking for help. That is where I take my ethics from.

If BUPA say they allow it, who are you to argue about the ethics? if you want to take your ethical influence from an insurance company; go ahead.... personally i find this unethical.

is this really ethical? Yes really? i woulnd't have thought so.... using something that you are not entitled to, to get more out of an insurance company.... no matter what the circumstances are... If BUPA say they allow it, who are you to argue about the ethics?

is this really ethical? Yes really? i woulnd't have thought so.... using something that you are not entitled to, to get more out of an insurance company.... no matter what the circumstances are...

is this really ethical? Yes

is this really ethical?

Bump

I am covered under BUPA. I didn't want to get any hopes up, however now that I have all this information I think we might be able to help. I too have a "pre-existing" condition, but never had to fill out any forms disclosing that when we were moved onto the BUPA scheme. So, that's one base covered. Now to see if DH's company will add on another person. I will try my hardest to get this for you OP. Thanks to Cara and Hendy for all the info. Let's get this ball rolling even faster and get the OP some coverage!! Wouldn't this be limited to employees only? By the way, when we signed up for Bupa as a family, we did not have to declare any pre-existing conditions. Hi PowerPuffMom, I was under the same impression initially (re: limited to employees). However, as Cara, Hendy and the OP have pointed out, BUPA does not require you to be an employee. The requirement is the group plan allows for pre-existing conditions. Being fortunate to be covered under a BUPA scheme with MHD, I figured the very least we could do was make an inquiry to our plan administrator on the OP's behalf. (And if others out there are under the same scheme, they might also inquire as well). This would be life changing for the OP. Below are excerpts from previous posts in the thread that might give you more answers to your question: [i'>"I would just like to clarify that it is 100% not a legal pre-requisite to work for a company in order to be on their group medical scheme. I set up and managed the schemes with previous employers; we had several additional people who were on both schemes who were not employed by the company. They were personally known to the MD. The company was happy to put them on the scheme; we got also got a better group rate as it was a small organisation and the individuals benefited from a group discount. Pre existing conditions were also covered. Please note that insurance fraud is only applicable if a company or individual does not have pre-exisiting conditions covered/medical history disregarded on the scheme. This will work out for the OP if they can secure cover with a BUPA scheme where medical history is disregarded. Is there anyone out there who administers their company insurance scheme or any husbands who are decision makers and could authorise someone to be added onto their BUPA group scheme (with MHD)?"[/i'>

I am covered under BUPA. I didn't want to get any hopes up, however now that I have all this information I think we might be able to help. I too have a "pre-existing" condition, but never had to fill out any forms disclosing that when we were moved onto the BUPA scheme. So, that's one base covered. Now to see if DH's company will add on another person. I will try my hardest to get this for you OP. Thanks to Cara and Hendy for all the info. Let's get this ball rolling even faster and get the OP some coverage!! Wouldn't this be limited to employees only? By the way, when we signed up for Bupa as a family, we did not have to declare any pre-existing conditions.

Bump for OP!

I am covered under BUPA. I didn't want to get any hopes up, however now that I have all this information I think we might be able to help. I too have a "pre-existing" condition, but never had to fill out any forms disclosing that when we were moved onto the BUPA scheme. So, that's one base covered. Now to see if DH's company will add on another person. I will try my hardest to get this for you OP. Thanks to Cara and Hendy for all the info. Let's get this ball rolling even faster and get the OP some coverage!!

I hope that someone can help the OP; this is not a good situation to be in. This could happen to any of us. I concur with regards to the governement medical card and it is often not possible to return to country of origin to receive free medical treatment; particularly if you have been out of the country for a number of years as therefore you are not entitled to free medical. I would just like to clarify that it is 100% not a legal pre-requisite to work for a company in order to be on their group medical scheme. I set up and managed the schemes with previous employers; we had several additional people who were on both schemes who were not employed by the company. They were personally known to the MD. The company was happy to put them on the scheme; we got also got a better group rate as it was a small organisation and the individuals benefited from a group discount. Pre exisiting conditions were also covered. When a company sets up a group scheme, they can choose to cover pre-exisiting conditions; (there is a premium up load for this and from an admin point of view, it is a lot easier as you just add the name of the person who is to join the scheme rather than ask them to complete the application form and submit medical records); this is known as ''medical history disregarded" /MHD. For example some BUPA schemes (or any other insurer) will not have MHD in place so the application form and medical history will need to be declared and other companies will have a scheme with MHD in place. Particularly large international companies who offer BUPA will have MHD in place as they want their employees to be covered. Please note that insurance fraud is only applicable if a company or individual does not have pre-exisiting conditions covered/medical history disregarded on the scheme. This will work out for the OP if they can secure cover with a BUPA scheme where medical history is disregarded. I really wish I could help the OP; unfortunately the schemes that I administered would not allow individuals to continue it in their own name after they left the company. Everyone needs to be aware of this possible situation should you become ill in this country and are unable to get private medical. The OP has highlighted this scenario and this could happen to any of us. When a company is paying for your private medical, you do not think you will ever need medical insurance in your own name to secure continous cover due to "what if I suddenly develop cancer and can't get cover in the future?'' I have also known a dear friend in this situation so I feel for the OP; the concern is not just immediate but long term and their request for help is really very valid. I too have heard that BUPA are the only company that will allow staff to continue with the scheme in their own name after they have left the company. I suggested this to my employer but BUPA was outside the budget. Hendy describes the process 100%. Hendy, is there any remote possibility that your last company would consider helping? I see that the OP will not even utilise the cover during the next 3 years so no risk to the company and they will pay the premium. Is there anyone out there who administers their company insurance scheme or any husbands who are decision makers and could authorise someone to be added onto their BUPA group scheme (with MHD)? To the OP, I hope someone can help. As Hendy says, it can make really make a difference to someone's life but not does not sit comfortably with most MDs. It just takes someone with a heart who is willing to ask.