PR campaign by Swiss Home Finance: "Beobachter" successfully defends itself at the Federal Supreme Court
Employees of the health insurance broker Swiss Home Finance forged signatures on documents when original signatures were missing. This is confirmed by a video and statements from former employees—and has now also been upheld by the Federal Supreme Court.
I
m Beobachter article "Using a fake signature to change health insurer" several former employees of the company had their say. According to their statements, employees in the Zurich office had sometimes signed documents themselves if the original signature was missing. And a video leaked to the Observer from the offices of Swiss Home Finance showed employees sticking a document with the customer's signature on the window, placing the unsigned document over it and tracing the signature. "This happens all the time, but certainly several times a week. I couldn't believe it at first," one ex-employee was quoted as saying in the article.
Bernard Duzhmani spoke at length in the article. Among other things, he emphasized that he would not tolerate forged signatures and that he clearly rejected the accusation that his company was being run using unfair or even criminal methods. "I am assuming an intrigue by a competitor," he was quoted as saying. He then filed a civil lawsuit against Beobachter with the help of media lawyer Rena Zulauf. And failed across the board - in May 2024 before the Zurich Commercial Court and now also before the Federal Supreme Court.
In the opinion of the judiciary, the observer has already succeeded with the video in providing "the main evidence that signatures of customers are traced in the plaintiff's office". The statements of former employees and internal documents also confirmed this - and were not an intrigue. Also descriptions from customers support the Beobachter article, according to the courts.
The courts do not accept any of Duzhmani's counter-arguments. Not even the claim that his quality assurance system makes it impossible to forge signatures. On the contrary, the Commercial Court stated "that an internal control system in which an employee carries out quality control cannot be reliable anyway if the questionable business practices with regard to signatures are not (necessarily) concealed internally, but - as can be seen on the video - took place openly in the office".
