The law makes it clear that one must be given the option to opt out of sharing personal data information with affiliates/partners where it is strictly not necessary for the provision of the insurance policy benefits

If you looked at that HSBC published terms....
"The bank think may interest the customer ...."

Thus, i believes, "If one don't liked what the bank thinks, .... don't let them do the thinking for you by not joining it"

If the law does not allowed other than what you described above

......did that law prohibits the consumers or participated persons to exit it or lodge a complaint to the authorities if or when the consumers felt their rights had not been accorded under the PDPA?

I think it is hard to hv a case, for once a person had sign to acknowledge that he "had read and understand" the contents in the document prior to joining it.

Then since you think you are right. what are you gonna do??
I belief,
Highlighting, complaining or making grievances here, will not yield much results on the info you wanted to convey or changes to the policy you wish to see .

Why i believed that?
Perhaps I belief many does not care about what you believed to be true and right and perhaps needed to be changed.

Yes, you can keep on postings,...
No issue to me...

Just that what do you wish to see changed from your postings?
If it is just for self satisfaction, ....keep on postings.

But as can be seen from my earlier postings....
I believed that once I signed and accepted the pdpa document and if I still liked to participate and join the product of the company under their TnC...
I has agreed and accepted it.

But you on other hand, believed that you right and  can change the system.

Good luck to your endeavour for chance, but I think you may hv better chance else where.

I still believe not many has your kind of thinkings. Hope my beliefs are wrong.

The components are clearly separable. The payment of RM10 per month is for the vitality fees. this RM10 does not impact the payment of premium of the customer's policy.

The rules are simple. you exercise every week by hitting the requirements set, they give you RM5, this RM5 comes in some voucher. this part has nothing to do with the insurance policy. in fact, i dont have a policy with AIA, since i'm only inside the AIA vitality programme due to my employer covering this cost for me.

there's no gym voucher but there's some gym tie up where if you join as member, they give you some discount. but i dont see much an issue here since i think of it has something like when i eat a restaurant, someone say, if you swipe this bank credit card, you get this free dish or discount.

as for proposition of what combined and muddled proposition, i can only say this. if this proposition does not work, the customers wont buy in, the capitalist nature of a company is, say bye bye to something not profitable or dont make sense.

But in my opinion, there's no muddling. If the customer indeed has Vitality and has a policy, using Ramjade's favourite CI product, actually it comes with cash bonus of up to 20% every year. so i guess one can view this like a premium discount of 20%. if someone is healthy, i think we dont need stats to prove that he/she is less likely to kena critical illness. it's just saying, if you are healthy you get discount. it's just similar to why smoker pay more than non-smoker OR why someone with health condition has to pay a loading. then we can also have healthy discount. for someone like me who actively exercise, i would welcome such extra value for me. of course we can still go back to the topic of why we dont like this product for so and so reason, but for argument sake, let's say i am ok with this product, then the extra "discount" is a reward to me as being healthy and also a motivator as well.

You keep saying treat customer fairly, give the savings for all. i can argue, no, i dont want to pay same price as the smoker. i dont want to pay same price as someone who sits on his bump, slightly overweight and dont' exercise.
^ the above sort of explains it as well.
as for the sharing data part, i will be honest, i'm not an expert on this BNM guideline or anything related to fair treatment to financial consumers. i will naively believe since these guideline exist, someone will ensure the companies are all abiding the guidelines. Like MUM say, that's what the authorities are for right.

AIA Vitality is an innovation. just like that AXA car insurance telematics thing, not sure still going strong or not. if i'm a safe driver, i install this thing for AXA to know i'm a safe driver, they give me discount based on my data due to i drive less or i'm a safe driver, why not? it's product innovation. if customers dont like, they vote with their wallet, dont buy.

just like ipad mini. i recall reading somewhere that steve jobs didnt believe it in. and here we are, we have 5 6 generations of ipad mini. got ppl buy, then apple will sell. if ppl dont buy, apple will stop selling.

but to-date, i have not received any calls from fitness first or anybody related to AIA partners to upsell me gym package or to sell me anything. even when i WAS not fitness first gym member but now i am. because i voluntarily signed up. but i'm not stupid. gosh they have lots of my exercises data, sleep data, my vege buying data...

Yes insurance is profitable business. so is apple selling iphone. so is banking business a profitable business. that's why these big corporation chasing digital banking business. Whatever it is, how is it relevant to the discussion? you run business want to make money right?

i already say, is the business encouraging their customers to be healthy, out of pure altruism? no la, but can it be win-win? i think can. if AIA didnt pass savings consumer (which i think they did), they charge their product expensive, their customer can buy from prudential or GE. market competition is there to keep this balance.

is it perfect? far from it, but i'm sure it can be improved over time like any products out there. there's so much improvement of iphone over the years right?
you cannot say like that. if you say like that, people think you dont care about PDPA or you dont want to discuss fairness issue to customers

You believe the law will be like that

I believed the law is not the way you see it.

Your choice to believe what you want to believe and you may also continue to believe that you can yield results here.

I don't believed that you can yield much (impactful) results here.

Good. Then hopefully can be seen or observed by the number of people taking action against AIA vitality.
Hope fully soon, else I may not live long enough to see it I the media.

8 yrs I think is more than enough time for its competitors or the authorities or people that think there is an issue to had brought it up already.

Added info
AIA vitality started in 2016, 3 yrs AFTER the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 (PDPA) came into force in Malaysia. It came into force on Nov 2013.

hafizmamak85 if you have some personal beef with AIA or AIA Vitality or it's PDPA whatever nonsense you've been spewing for the last 5 pages. Open your own thread and talk about it.

cherroy

Why now changed topic to GE?
No more about AIA vitality sharing of personal info which you believed was not correct and against law?

Is there any new specific changes to that requirement that are not practiced before 2016?

Company provides the t&c
Customer read and signed to accept.
If Customer can cancel the agreement later
The company can then refuse to provide that product.

If you are asking if there were specific BNM policies on consent prior to the MCIPD PD, I don't think so. This particular policy of MCIPD PD on consent is only applicable for consent being obtained from 1 January 2024. It does not apply to broad based and non voluntary consent obtained prior to 2024. So, old policies are exempted from this requirement. This is my understanding.

So no case against AIA vitality then?

After having met the requirements Just pay to join and sign to accept the stated TnC? Cannot?

BTW, we hv seen many unfair discrimination policy by the govt too. .....(off topic)

I believe, as long as there is, ...

Company provides the t&c
Customer read and signed to accept.
If Customer were to cancel the agreement later
The company can then refuse to provide that product/service.

Should be OK as it is a mutually agreed contracts.
The customers should pay attentions to what were written in the contract. No agree don't accept to use it

I believe it is good to hv vitality programs as it encourages subscribers to be healthy thus saved the money pool from depleted faster.
Those that does not want to join does not want to see the money pool last longer.
So I would definitely be ok to penalise those not supporting the money pool longevity.

Just like govt gives out cheaper road tax to ev car.
Ev car or combustible engine cars also uses the same road.

BTW, why now talked about this and no more talked about AIA vitality sharing of personal data without consent which were duscussed since this afternoon ??

Is it wrong to want to enhance profits of existing business?
The banks had been making billions, yet the govt approved the mandatory RM8 for atm card use which I had to pay every year.

Why need to use the bank facilities? The bank also share your data...(as that hsbc per image I posted hours earlier)