^
+ Follow PRYCE PLANS Tag
PRYCE PLANS
Array
(
    [results] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 1306430
                    [Title] => Positive turns for Pryce, Phl Prudential planholders
                    [Summary] => 

After having written six pieces in this space, detailing the complaints of unfair and unjust treatment of policy/plan holders by two big insurance and two pre-need companies, positive turns have developed for the aggrieved planholders of Philippine Prudential Life Insurance Co. and Pryce Plans, Inc.

[DatePublished] => 2014-03-29 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133567 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804785 [AuthorName] => Satur C. Ocampo [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [1] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 1303726 [Title] => Revisiting Pryce Plans’ unjust, unfair ‘settlement’ [Summary] =>

Six years ago (March 17, 2008) my modest pension-plan contract with Pryce Plans, Inc. matured, after I had diligently paid P256,800 in premiums over 10 years.  The company asked me to choose the mode of payment on my claim. I chose immediate full lump-sum: P300,000.

[DatePublished] => 2014-03-22 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133567 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804785 [AuthorName] => Satur C. Ocampo [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [2] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 1128091 [Title] => Parallels: Pork barrel, insurance, pre-need scams [Summary] =>

This column’s August 17 piece (“Insurance Commission remiss in regulating pre-need firms”) has elicited more reader reactions.

[DatePublished] => 2013-08-24 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133567 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804785 [AuthorName] => Satur C. Ocampo [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [3] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 1100271 [Title] => Insurance Commission remiss in regulating pre-need firms [Summary] =>

Last April 20 and 27, I wrote about how Pryce Plans, Inc. and its president, Salvador P. Escano, treated me over the lump-sum payment of my modest (P300,000) pension plan that the company was obligated to hand over to me in 2008.

[DatePublished] => 2013-08-17 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133567 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804785 [AuthorName] => Satur C. Ocampo [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [4] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 935449 [Title] => Other victims outraged by Pryce Plans unfairness [Summary] =>

Strong reactions from readers met last week’s column piece detailing how Pryce Plans, Inc. tried, in vain, to induce me into accepting only 40% of the cash value of my P300,000 pension plan that matured five years ago or taking 80% equivalent in liquefied petroleum gas or memorial plots.

[DatePublished] => 2013-04-27 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133567 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804785 [AuthorName] => Satur C. Ocampo [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [5] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 932739 [Title] => My pension plan issue with Pryce Plans, Inc. [Summary] =>

Five years ago, I entertained hopes of promptly receiving the lump-sum cash settlement of a modest pension plan I had signed 10 years earlier with Pryce Plans, Inc., based on the tenor of the notice they sent.

[DatePublished] => 2013-04-20 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133567 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804785 [AuthorName] => Satur C. Ocampo [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [6] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 440466 [Title] => Pre-need planholders get LPG, memorial lots [Summary] =>

MANILA, Philippines - Cash-strapped pre-need firm Pryce Plans Inc. has opted to fulfill its obligation to plan holders by paying them in kind – specifically, through medicines, cooking gas and memorial lots.

[DatePublished] => 2009-02-16 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133272 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => [AuthorName] => [SectionName] => News Commentary [SectionUrl] => news-commentary [URL] => http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/706/sfthumbyl9.jpg ) [7] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 289597 [Title] => SEC issues show-cause letters to 4 pre-need firms [Summary] => The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued separate orders directing four other pre-need companies to explain why they should not be sanctioned for violation of the rules on the sale and registration of pre-need plans.

The four are Platinum Plans, Pryce Plans, AMA Plans and Primanila Plans.

The show-cause letters were already sent to the four companies and the SEC is now awaiting their reply prior to imposing any sanctions against them.
[DatePublished] => 2005-08-03 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 133272 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1804021 [AuthorName] => Zinnia B. Dela Peña [SectionName] => Business [SectionUrl] => business [URL] => ) ) )
abtest
Are you sure you want to log out?
X
Login

Philstar.com is one of the most vibrant, opinionated, discerning communities of readers on cyberspace. With your meaningful insights, help shape the stories that can shape the country. Sign up now!

Get Updated:

Signup for the News Round now

FORGOT PASSWORD?
SIGN IN
or sign in with