is this situation illegal?

[dionx]

say someone didn't have insurance on a cell phone. a year later, it starts to act broken so that person adds insurance to the bill. then he gets a new phone minus the deductible after trade in on the broken one. then he can cancels the insurance since he just wanted it only for the broken phone to be fixed or replaced. then say something happens later on with the phone and he add insurance to it again so i can claim it and get a new one.

is this legal or illegal? or is this a question of morals?

 

[boyRacer]

a loophole maybe?

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Why the hell would you insure a cell phone? In a year it is outdated junk anyway.

 

[rudeguy]

Originally posted by: dionx
say someone didn't have insurance on a cell phone. a year later, it starts to act broken so that person adds insurance to the bill. then he gets a new phone minus the deductible after trade in on the broken one. then he can cancels the insurance since he just wanted it only for the broken phone to be fixed or replaced. then say something happens later on with the phone and he add insurance to it again so i can claim it and get a new one.

is this legal or illegal? or is this a question of morals?

most places make you have insurance on the phone for 90 days before you make a claim if you didnt put insurance on it at activation

 

[ptyes]

Yea, it's illegal, but that doesn't mean you can't do it

 

[erikiksaz]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
Why the hell would you insure a cell phone? In a year it is outdated junk anyway.

Just in case you lose the phone, break it, etc.

 

[dionx]

Originally posted by: ptyes
Yea, it's illegal, but that doesn't mean you can't do it

how is it illegal? if it were insurance fraud like faking it's broken or lost but its not i can see that being illegal. but say it legitamitely broke and only adding insurance only when needing to make a legitimate claim.. is that part illegal? isn't it the insurance's company's who are to make sure first that the product in question is ok to be insured to begin with? or is that just a loophole? and are loopholes legal?

 

[amnesiac]

Originally posted by: erikiksaz

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
Why the hell would you insure a cell phone? In a year it is outdated junk anyway.

Just in case you lose the phone, break it, etc.

Plus when you want to get a new phone you just drop your obsolete one in a puddle of water. Oops.

 

[ptyes]

If you're paying like $300 for a top-of-the-line phone model, I'd get insurance, at least for six or nine months. That's an investment. But, I wouldn't insure some free phone they give away when you sign a plan, that's just stupid.

 

[StageLeft]

Morally it's illegal. Legally not sure - but it sounds a bit like insurance fraud although I suppose if he waits the delays and what not - say 90 days - then maybe it's not illegal.

 

[BennyD]

legal, as it was not broken when you took out insurance, you would merely be forseeing it breaking or in other words being worried.

 

[dionx]

Originally posted by: BennyD
legal, as it was not broken when you took out insurance, you would merely be forseeing it breaking or in other words being worried.

what if it was already broken when adding insurance... but the insurance company never asked the initial condition? or are there certain assumptions to be made when adding insurance on the claimee's part?

 

[godmare]

Originally posted by: dionx

Originally posted by: BennyD
legal, as it was not broken when you took out insurance, you would merely be forseeing it breaking or in other words being worried.

what if it was already broken when adding insurance... but the insurance company never asked the initial condition? or are there certain assumptions to be made when adding insurance on the claimee's part?

And everybody wonders why insurance companies are such d!cks

 

[BennyD]

IF(broken = true, Call Insurance_Fruad, nice_and_legal = true);

 

[MrBond]

say someone didn't have insurance on a cell phone. a year later, it starts to act broken so that person adds insurance to the bill. then he gets a new phone minus the deductible after trade in on the broken one. then he can cancels the insurance since he just wanted it only for the broken phone to be fixed or replaced. then say something happens later on with the phone and he add insurance to it again so i can claim it and get a new one.

So this is something you've done already?

How are you getting insurance on a used phone? When I got mine, they would only give it to me at the point of sale, I coudln't add it 6 months later.

 

[Topher]

Insurance on a cell phone? I'd check the find print. They most likely will require you to have the phone insured for a certain amount of time before making a claim, unless it's been insured from the day you activated it. They also may need some proof that the phone is in working order when you insure it (only if you insure it at a time other than activation) - then again, they may not, but they are ripe for fraud then. And anyone who drops their phone in a puddle, just because they want a new one may be in for a surprise. I don't know about North America, but back in Australia, liquid ingress was beyond any warranty or insurance claim. (At least, until Nokia admitted faults in their 8210s). That, and it's just pathetic. The phone I got in Australia over a year ago is as good as, or better than all the crappy ones they offer over here. Why does North America have to be so behind the times when it comes to mobile phones?

 

[dionx]

my friend had his nokia 8290 until the contract expired. after that it broke, so he added insurance over the phone. after the first bill came in making sure it was added, he made a claim that it was broken. it was approved, went to the nearest store, and after a $35 deductible gave him a new phone without having to sign a contract and what not. this was alot better than him signing a contract to get a new phone at activation price. he now plans to cancel the insurance because he can always cancel his phone if he loses it. but after a year, he wants to add insurance again if and when it breaks just so he can make a claim again.

i think it's wrong, or is it just a loophole that is legal because it's just that.. a loophole.