I am considering buying either the IMG Passport Protection Plus or the Liaison International. I understand that neither of these plans covers pre-existing conditions. But it appears to me that the definition of "pre-existing conditions" is more favorable for policy holders in case of the Liaison International plan.
According to the policy wording for Liaison International, a pre-existing condition is "a condition that would have caused a person to seek medical advise, diagnosis, care or treatment...."
So, if there were a condition that "existed" (like say a tumor) at the time of application, but was not known to the insured person, for which there were absolutely no symptoms in the past (and therefore not requiring the person to seek medical advise), then such a condition does not fit the above definition of pre-existing condition.
However, under the policy wording of Passport Protection Plus, this condition would be considered pre-existing, because their definition of pre-existing conditions includes conditions "... whether or not previously manifested or symptomatic..."
So my question is: Is this analysis correct? If not, why not?
According to the policy wording for Liaison International, a pre-existing condition is "a condition that would have caused a person to seek medical advise, diagnosis, care or treatment...."
So, if there were a condition that "existed" (like say a tumor) at the time of application, but was not known to the insured person, for which there were absolutely no symptoms in the past (and therefore not requiring the person to seek medical advise), then such a condition does not fit the above definition of pre-existing condition.
However, under the policy wording of Passport Protection Plus, this condition would be considered pre-existing, because their definition of pre-existing conditions includes conditions "... whether or not previously manifested or symptomatic..."
So my question is: Is this analysis correct? If not, why not?
Comment