started · updated
Unit-linked insurance: Poor performance is not necessarily a legal error
Legal experts note that poor financial performance in unit-linked life or pension insurance policies does not inherently constitute a legal error or fraud by the insurer. In these products, the contract value is heavily dependent on fund development, meaning the policyholder frequently bears the associated capital market risk.
According to a 2015 decision by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH, case IV ZR 513/14), if a policy is subject to restitution under enrichment law, the policyholder must still account for any losses incurred in the underlying funds. The court reasoned that because the fund investment was a central component of the product decision, the consumer accepts both the potential for market gains and the risk of losses.
While poor performance is not a legal error, unit-linked policies remain subject to scrutiny regarding legal compliance. Key areas for investigation include whether the contract followed the correct policy model, whether objection instructions were properly provided, and whether insurance conditions and consumer information were fully disclosed.
Entities
Claims
What the coverage asserts, and how many sources carry each claim.
- [● 3 SOURCES] Poor financial performance in unit-linked pension or life insurance does not automatically constitute a legal error by the insurer. neue-pressemitteilungen.de · www.presseschleuder.com · schlaunews.de
- [● 3 SOURCES] Policyholders of unit-linked insurance products often bear the capital market risk. neue-pressemitteilungen.de · www.presseschleuder.com · schlaunews.de
- [● 3 SOURCES] In a 2015 ruling, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) determined that policyholders must account for fund losses during the restitution of unit-linked life insurance policies. neue-pressemitteilungen.de · www.presseschleuder.com · schlaunews.de