{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1285777,
        "msgid": "please-clarify-1447899208",
        "date": "2000-12-15 00:00:00",
        "title": "Please clarify",
        "author": null,
        "source": "JP",
        "tags": null,
        "topic": null,
        "summary": "Please clarify We, the Foundation of Indonesian Insurance Consumers (YLKAI), welcome the insurance claim payment by PT Asuransi Jiwa Manulife Indonesia (\"Manulife\") to the heirs of the late Lt. Col. (Navy) Paulus Tanuhandaru (customer). However, we have received a number of questions from some insurance consumers about this unusual claim payment, due to the fact that Manulife is yet to admit its debt to the customer despite having paid the claim in full, plus interest.",
        "content": "<p>Please clarify<\/p>\n<p>We, the Foundation of Indonesian Insurance Consumers (YLKAI),<br>\nwelcome the insurance claim payment by PT Asuransi Jiwa Manulife<br>\nIndonesia (\"Manulife\") to the heirs of the late Lt. Col. (Navy)<br>\nPaulus Tanuhandaru (customer). However, we have received a number<br>\nof questions from some insurance consumers about this unusual<br>\nclaim payment, due to the fact that Manulife is yet to admit its<br>\ndebt to the customer despite having paid the claim in full, plus<br>\ninterest.<\/p>\n<p>Therefore, as an information service for insurance consumers<br>\nin Indonesia, we would like Manulife to clarify the following:<br>\n 1. If Manulife's payment to its customer is not intended as the<br>\npayment of a debt arising from the policy claim, is this payment<br>\naccountable both on a legal basis and on the basis of good<br>\nintent? We request that Manulife explain the fulfillment of what<br>\nobligation the payment has been made under.<br>\n 2. If the payment is made only to avoid a ruling on the<br>\nbankruptcy of Manulife, which can be passed on it should it<br>\nrefuse to make payment, as reportedly notified earlier to<br>\nManulife by the judge hearing a bankruptcy case, please let us<br>\nknow whether the judge divulged this information during the court<br>\nproceeding or out of court. YLKAI attended each official trial<br>\nsession open to the public but never heard the judge say anything<br>\nto that effect.<br>\n 3. If Manulife thinks that the information that the judge<br>\ndivulged before the reading of the official verdict was in<br>\nviolation of Law No. 14\/1985, it can be concluded that this<br>\ninformation is illegal. Manulife should explain why it has made a<br>\nbusiness decision of such importance on the basis of an illegal<br>\nand uncertain piece of information.<\/p>\n<p>We look forward to, and give thanks, for the anticipated<br>\nresponse from Manulife.<\/p>\n<p>EFLIN BUTAR BUTAR<\/p>\n<p>YLKAI<\/p>\n<p>Jakarta<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/please-clarify-1447899208",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}