avant ou après l'adhésion pour sa part

04:04 Jun 17, 2020 

to me is that a "right answer" arrived to by pure luck / with a wrong explanation is in fact NOT helping much.

It's not for nothing that an explanation is required for proposed translations - the explanation IS PART OF the answer. It can help those reading the questions/answers months or years later to decide to which extent the questions/answer is relevant to their texts - and anyway would you want to use a dictionary with whimsical explanations, that might have or might not any any connection with the meaning of the word as used in the specific context? Kudoz is supposed to be a "glossary building exercise" ...

IOW it's rather the idea that "explanations do not matter" than I would find extremely problematic.

03:36 Jun 17, 2020 

Reytturning to this after a long break, I just realized FR "adhere/adhesion" in insurance not only is unrelated to any concept of unjust contracts as in EN, but also is probably related etymologically and functionally to EN intransitive verb "attach," which refers to the moment of formation of a legal relationship. I.e., when the legal state of affairs comes into existence, the relationship attaches.

So the FR isn't that far off from the EN: when the policy adheres (adhesion), it takes effect.

Sorry I didn't realize this initially, but in EN law "attach" in this sense seems pretty archaic.

03:33 Jun 17, 2020 

Except that disagreeing with a right answer, however it was arrived at, is problematic on this forum for obvious reasons, especially if you then go and agree with another answer instead !!!
Why not just give it an agree but with a comment instead?

02:53 Jun 17, 2020 

A clarification: In my rulebook the right answer is NOT enough if the accompanying explanation / underlying reasoning is wrong. Smacks of getting it right by pure accident, and "getting it right by accident" doesn't sound to me like a method to recommend. Most people may not care much about it, but points of methodology are mon dada favori ... The process is what leads to results, so improving the process is important.

Specifically, in case od Kudoz questions - the first step is to question the question itself i.e. ignore the formulation of the question and look at the Source Text. Occasionally you find that the way the question is formulated is an open trap / an invitation to crash in the nearest tree ...

06:21 Jun 14, 2020 

A French life insurance policy will cover you from the date on which the company says it is on risk. It can be the date of issue or any other date the company specifies, for whatever reason (special circumstances, etc.) That date appears in the policy which you have accepted by subscribing to it. Again, I agree with your and Daryo's reading (not sure why he disagrees with you), except for the definition of the date on which the co is on risk (date the policy is issued? signed? takes effect?), and, therefore, the date that will decide if and when the proceeds are split among the deceased beneficiary's heirs. But zac will know as the inception date must appear in her/his doc.

I agree with Daryo's answer because "subscribe" (as in: "accept the policy and its conditions") is closer to adhésion than your "issuance".

Re: your Moniteur ref. Have you checked when they stopped publishing it? In any case, your example is about a mutual ins co and what they say here is that by subscribing to their policy, you also subscribe (adhésion) to the statutes of the mutual ins co - that's how mutual ins cos work, as you know. That is not what zac's text and question are about.

19:15 Jun 13, 2020 

The reason I'm asking if French life insurance is typically guaranteed-issue is because "adhésion" is the act by which an insurance contract comes into existence:

"Le fait de remettre, à une société mutuelle, un bulletin d'adhésion dûment signé, après avoir pris connaissance de ses statuts, constitue envers la Société, une adhésion formelle aux dits statuts, laquelle a pour effet de lier définitivement le nouveau sociétaire à la Société..." (Le Moniteur des assurances: revue mensuelle, Volume 37 p.695 -- cf. Google Books).

So what this clause means is that if the named beneficiary dies before or after a binding insurance contract comes into existence--IOW the beneficiary dies before the person being insured and the insurance company have completed the process of "lier définitivement" the insured person "à la Société d'assurance," or at any time afterwards--then that beneficiary's share shall be distributed as stated in the clause.

That's the concept we're looking for. Policy issuance covers it in US English, since that's the process that culminates in a binding insurance contract between the parties. What's the UK equivalent?

16:15 Jun 13, 2020 

At least in the US, with a few exceptions, life insurance isn't something you can just decide to "adhérer" to. The insurer will require a medical examination first, in order to decide whether to insure you. (This is how one unfortunate family friend discovered that he had advanced cancer -- the medical exam found it; the insurer refused to cover him for that reason; he died).

So it is a multi-step process: You apply, they schedule a medical exam for you, the test results come in, and then depending on the test results they either cover you as agreed, offer less coverage or a higher price, or refuse to cover you. The point at which they accept you (or they offer worse insurance and you accept it) is critical, because without it there's no policy, no policy date, etc.

Some employers offer guaranteed-issue life insurance policies. Most don't. What's the situation in France? Is life insurance guaranteed-issue, or can insurers refuse you? I ask because that will help us determine what exactly "adhésion" is in the life-insurance context (not just the general insurance context.

16:11 Jun 13, 2020 

I'm not following what you've said here: that "adhésion is simply a synonym for garantie." The link you posted doesn't say that, and "garantie" in the insurance context isn't something you do; it's the coverage you get under the policy:
"Les garanties sont les engagements que prend votre assureur vis à vis de vous. Elles sont énumérées dans votre police d'assurance." https://www.luko.eu/dictionnaire-assurance/definition-garant...

06:00 Jun 13, 2020 

I agree with Eliza's reasoning, but not with her translation.

Life insurance has its own terminology, in French anyway, and adhésion is simply a synonym for garantie in other classes of insurance: “Acte par lequel une personne adhère... par la signature d’un bulletin d’adhésion.” (https://www.carac.fr/lexique/adhesion). So this is indeed about the beneficiary’s share in the (proceeds of the) deceased’s life insurance policy.

However, in terms of translation, the date on which a policy is issued (especially a life policy) is not necessarily the same as its inception date and “issuance” or “date of issue” can be misleading: “The issue date is normally the date on which the insurance company approves and accepts your application. The policy date is the date written on the policy. These two are sometimes the same, but… The effective date is the date on which the legal obligation by the insurance company is created.” (https://law.freeadvice.com/insurance_law/life_insurance_law/...

I would suggest that the effective date (adhésion) is what matters in your case, but this needs to be clarified with the client.

23:39 Jun 12, 2020 

Hello
Looking at the discussion and disagrees about "adhésiion", I wonder if "bequeathment" could be used?

20:11 Jun 12, 2020 

I agree with MrRafe and others that "pour sa part" is referring to a share (of life insurance proceeds) and doesn't mean "on their part."

But in the insurance context, "adhésion" happens when the insurance company approves your application and issues the policy. It has nothing to do with the consent or acceptance of your beneficiaries. It's also a "faux ami" to the EN legal term "contract of adhesion." Unlike that EN legal term, there is no negative connotation to "adhésion" in a FR insurance contract.

12:27 Jun 12, 2020 

I don't see that Tony's reading differs from Asker's. We all seem to agree that someone receives an actual "part"and the policy isn't talking just idiomatically about "on his part."

Having said that, I agree with Asker that acceptance is the nearest EN equivalent. The validity and scope of acceptance can become disputed should there occur adhesion in the EN sense where the EN word connotes potentially objectionable exploitation of one party by the other, but EN (in USA at least) does not presume adhesion in the normal course of honest offer and acceptance. I.e., adhesion conveys a whiff of corruption among EN speakers but not in libertine FR.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/a/adhesion-contract.asp

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/pf/06/insurancecontrac...