AAA What's The Skinny On Them??

[0b1kanobee]

How does she even know that it is a fraternal?? With the people I deal with this subject has NEVER came up.

She looked them up on the internet. Her words were "this doesn't look like an ordinary insurance company" or something to that effect. She asks about ratings and all sorts of stuff no matter how many times I've worked around that issue. It's indeed an objection/concern for her.

Doesn't matter anymore as she does not want life insurance (at the moment) and she already has a pre-need plan paid for. With 16 grandchildren, that would have to be one decent policy to make it work out.

 

[TDFnCali]

You can't let her "decide for herself" if her AARP is out of contestability. If she wanted to change that it's because she doesn't know better. You have to be the one to tell her to not change her policy.

So in other words u give no weight to the fact 1, 2, 5 yrs from now her AARP policy could raise her premium & she then couldnt afford it? I would think getting a LOCKED in price is worth considering!

 

[0b1kanobee]

Interesting.

If you "sold yourself well" why do they need to meet with Raymond James and Edward Jones?
Prediction: even if you have the best "plan", they'll do it - but with Edward Jones. Care for a wager? Probably why you've got your "fingers crossed".

She's been with E.J. for many years. Her old adviser is no longer there. She's not happy. Plus E.J. can't do what we can do for her due to their strict guidelines they have in place for their advisers. Our numbers can beat E.J. no problem. It's R.J. I'm a little concerned about because a close relative just went to work for the local adviser.

She always gets more than one opinion. We are coming in last with our plan and numbers so we have an advantage there. Nobody can beat our numbers with either of those firms. The group I work with takes money from them all the time. I don't ever recall anyone in our group losing a client to either. Not saying it hasn't happened but I've never seen it.

She was concerned we weren't for her because our website gave her the impression she didn't have enough money to work with us and we have five offices but the closest one is in the Hoity Toity part of Central Florida (Park Avenue) and the other is on the beach side.

The only way we will lose the case is if someone blows smoke up her tail because there is zero wiggle room for her main goal (income number, inflation, ect. ect.) Also we don't have a local office in this shite hole town.

 

[senior-advisor-indiana]

So in other words u give no weight to the fact 1, 2, 5 yrs from now her AARP policy could raise her premium & she then couldnt afford it? I would think getting a LOCKED in price is worth considering!

She is on dialysis so what are the odds of her living 2 more years...

 

[jdeasy]

So in other words u give no weight to the fact 1, 2, 5 yrs from now her AARP policy could raise her premium & she then couldnt afford it? I would think getting a LOCKED in price is worth considering!

Only if she is willing to have both policies for two years and then drop the AARP.

You already said it wasn't their term policy. That means it's their UL. It's probably not going to go up in price. Their certainly is a better chance that she would die within 2 years than to have a rate increase.

Sometimes standing pat is the best option.

 

[rousemark]

How does she even know that it is a fraternal?? With the people I deal with this subject has NEVER came up.

Sounds as if the AAA agent did a good job of covering all the bases to keep another agent from coming in behind and replacing the business..

 

[Newby]

Only if she is willing to have both policies for two years and then drop the AARP.

You already said it wasn't their term policy. That means it's their UL. It's probably not going to go up in price. Their certainly is a better chance that she would die within 2 years than to have a rate increase.

Sometimes standing pat is the best option.

I agree that I wouldn't touch the non-contestable NYL/AARP policy.

But I did run across a UL policy from Met Life last week that was a group deal similar to the AARP design. Designed to be in force to age 90. When we called on the info they said it DID have an unscheduled rate increase in 2010 and the lady said it LOOKS like we will probably have another one this year.

I asked what happen that they had to raise the rates.

She said too many people were dieing.

I thought that was the whole point.

 

[0b1kanobee]

Sounds as if the AAA agent did a good job of covering all the bases to keep another agent from coming in behind and replacing the business..

Not in my case. It was a mailer she had received. She showed it to me when I went to her house. Like I said, she looked up the company on the internet.

Said she never heard of RNA, Foresters, Assurity, American Amicable, Monumental, along with the six or so others I have.

If it wasn't AAA, Snoopy, Geico, Allstate, Farm this or that, she hadn't heard of them. It wasn't a waste of time though as I'm hoping to get other business out of it this week.

As far as replacing AAA and those kinds of policies, I wonder how many die while coverage could of been inforce? One I replaced with WL was 25K and now he has only 10k WL and not long to live. I'm sure it isn't as many who outlive the term or whatever but sure does suck. The only thing that makes me feel better about that case is he was having a difficult time with the 25k term policy going up in price and wasn't making premium regularly.

 

[TDFnCali]

Only if she is willing to have both policies for two years and then drop the AARP.

You already said it wasn't their term policy. That means it's their UL. It's probably not going to go up in price. Their certainly is a better chance that she would die within 2 years than to have a rate increase.

Sometimes standing pat is the best option.

Well I guess knowing the "chances" of an increase make sense, but short of knowing that (and its more likely u wont know that) I wouldnt wanna play judge & jury to determine if "this person's going to live 2yrs or not". Im going to have to disagree & say my approach would be to CLEARLY state what the pros & cons of each policy making sure the client fully understands, then let them decide which is best for them.

Again, that would or could change (where I would then agree with u) if I knew in advance the chances of that existing policy raising their rates was very low. In this case, she only 61, besides diabeties <sp> pretty healthy (relatively) and Ive had relatives live a long time on dialysis, so I have no clue if shes got 2yrs or 15!

 

[jdeasy]

Well I guess knowing the "chances" of an increase make sense, but short of knowing that (and its more likely u wont know that) I wouldnt wanna play judge & jury to determine if "this person's going to live 2yrs or not". Im going to have to disagree & say my approach would be to CLEARLY state what the pros & cons of each policy making sure the client fully understands, then let them decide which is best for them.

Again, that would or could change (where I would then agree with u) if I knew in advance the chances of that existing policy raising their rates was very low. In this case, she only 61, besides diabeties <sp> pretty healthy (relatively) and Ive had relatives live a long time on dialysis, so I have no clue if shes got 2yrs or 15!

Are you not there to advise them? Did you not build up trust with the prospect in order to be able to advise them?

The folks we see are pretty much clueless about insurance. The are counting on us to help them make the right choice. Of course we can be wrong. Nothing wrong with making an error, but I believe it is intentionally wrong to advise a person to give up a policy that is out of contestability in favor of a new ROP policy.

I suppose it is a matter of opinion and this is mine.