We have the Land Transport Authority for transport and the Infocomm Development Authority for telecommunications, so which is the authority to protect consumers in health-care insurance?

As long as health-care insurance providers are not regulated, private providers will make decisions that benefit them with little concern for consumers. In this case, healthcare insurers will impose stringent terms to avoid future obligations without reasonable justification.

I say this based on a recent incident when I tried to upgrade my husband's healthcare insurance plan with Incomeshield. The surprising response was that it was subject to an exclusion of 'right shoulder conditions'. We cannot reconcile this with a declaration that my husband had shoulder surgery many years ago after he dislocated his right shoulder.

After numerous calls and e-mail messages asking Income to clarify what 'right shoulder conditions' specifically included, since this is an all-encompassing term, we were unable to get any clarification. The only reply was that it meant all conditions related to right shoulder.

How can such an exclusion term be acceptable? It is a term so general, it can include a future cut or accident to the right shoulder which is totally unrelated to his previous surgery. Further, we are advised that provision of a doctor's report to show complete recovery will not result in waiver of the exclusion, although Income may consider something more specific on the exclusion term.

This response from Singapore's largest health-care insurer shows consumers have no protection.

Sim Siew Chen (Ms)