The risks of life assurance : suggested by a history of the case of Geach v. Ingall, in which the Imperial life Assurance Company, by the verdicts of three different special juries, was defeated in an attempt to evade payment of a policy.

Date:
1848
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: The risks of life assurance : suggested by a history of the case of Geach v. Ingall, in which the Imperial life Assurance Company, by the verdicts of three different special juries, was defeated in an attempt to evade payment of a policy. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    8/28 (page 8)
    policy—were willing to purchase it—permitted it to be trans- ferred to a purchaser, whom they afterwards acknowledged— and in every respect treated it as a valid policy for three years and three quarters. In January, 1844, the certificate of the birth and death of the assured, and all other necessary documents, were forwarded to the office, and the payment of the amount assured claimed by Mr. Beale. At the expiration of about three months, the claimant was informed by Mr. Edmunds, the agent, that the office had unfavourable impressions, and that he expected they would decline to pay the money. An interview afterwards took place between the claimant’s brother, Mr. W. J. Beale, and Mr. Samuel Ingall, the actuary of the Imperial Life Office, at which Mr. Ingall stated that the directors did not absolutely refuse to pay the money, but that they had “ unfavourable impressions,” which they were willing to afford the claimant an opportunity to remove; upon being pressed, however, Mr. Ingall declined to state what grounds the directors had for the ‘c unfavourable impressions” referred to, but hinted that they were willing to compromise. The following correspondence then took place: — [COPY.] Birmingham, March 29, 1844. Sir, On my return from London, where I have been engaged for some time on Parliamentary business, I have learnt, with great surprise, that the Directors of the Imperial Life Assurance Company object to pay the amount assured upon the life of the late John Scott, under a policy effected by him in May, 1840, and purchased by me, from his assignees, in 1842. I am satisfied that it can only be from a misrepresentation of the facts of the case, that the directors can have raised this objection. Since my return, I have seen Mr. Edmunds, your agent here, and my brother, Mr. W. J. Beale, and although they have fully detailed to me the communications made by you to them, at an interview about a fortnight since, I am unable to understand, defi- nitely, the grounds upon which the objection of the directors rest; except, indeed, that an assurance was granted by another office, to a person of whom I know nothing, and of which I never heard till after the death of Scott, seven or eight months after I had purchased the policy in question, and that the directors of that company think they can successfully resist the payment.