the holding of the public respondent to the contrary

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: plying for MRI and actually collecting the premium and service fee? Held: The MRI effect shall take effect: when the application shall be approved, and when the full premium is paid during the continued good health of the applicant. The MRI Pool, however, did not approve the application. There is also no showing that it accepted the sum of P1476.00 with the full knowledge that it was payment for Dan's premium. As a result, no perfected contract of insurance. The liability of DBP is another matter. It was DBP that required Dans to secure MRI coverage. Instead of 44 allowing Dans to look for his own insurance carrier or some other form of insurance policy, DBP compelled him to apply with the DBP MRI Pool. In dealing with Das, DBP was wearing two legal hats: the first as a lender, and the second as an insurance agent. As an insurance agent, DBP made Dans go through the motion of applying for said insurance, thereby lead him and his family to believe that they had already fulfilled all the requirements for the MRI and that the issuance of their policy was forthcoming. DBP had full knowledge that Dan's application was never going to be approved, with the maximum age to acceptance is 60 years old as specified in Article 1 of the Group Mortgage Redemption Insuranc Policy. Under Art. 1987, the agent who acts as such is not personally liable to the party with whom he contracts, unless he expressly binds himself or exceeds the limits of his authority without giving such party sufficient notice of his powers. Knowing all the while that Das was ineligible, Dbp exceeds the scope of its authority when it accepted the application by collecting the insurance premium, and deducting its agent's commission and service fee. Liability of an agent who exceeds the scope of his authority depends upon whether the third person is aware of the limits of the agent's power. There is no showing that Das knew of the limitation of DBP's authority to solicit applications for MRI. The rule that the agent is liable when he acts without authority is founded upon the supposition that there had been some wrong or omission on his part eit...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online