AIG Insurance

[James]

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/content/Settlement.html

Obviously the SEC has noted problems with Weiss also. I read your link and this Weiss is something!

 

[James]

I just signed up as an agent with AIG and have there software but, I have no idea what product is the mortgage protection. I don't understand the program at all.

They don't have a quote "mortgage product", you'll want to use the Ultra products. Most companies don't have seperate products that specifically aims to rip people off, just use the proper word, that is "Term".

 

[dvd493]

I just signed up as an agent with AIG and have there software but, I have no idea what product is the mortgage protection. I don't understand the program at all.

They don't have a quote "mortgage product", you'll want to use the Ultra products. Most companies don't have seperate products that specifically aims to rip people off, just use the proper word, that is "Term".

James,

I appreciate some of what you said but, why the "rip off" comment. If this was a rip off, an insurance company wouldn't have created it. Can we just not go negative on what the other agents do. I think it's fair to say that most of us want to help our clients. Most of us also have our own opinions on how to do it. There are many products for many agents who have many opinions. We all think were correct. Can we just leave it at that?

 

[James]

I just signed up as an agent with AIG and have there software but, I have no idea what product is the mortgage protection. I don't understand the program at all.

They don't have a quote "mortgage product", you'll want to use the Ultra products. Most companies don't have seperate products that specifically aims to rip people off, just use the proper word, that is "Term".

James,

I appreciate some of what you said but, why the "rip off" comment. If this was a rip off, an insurance company wouldn't have created it. Can we just not go negative on what the other agents do. I think it's fair to say that most of us want to help our clients. Most of us also have our own opinions on how to do it. There are many products for many agents who have many opinions. We all think were correct. Can we just leave it at that?

No, there is no such thing as Mortgage Insurance, its nothing but term repackage and generally the one that repackage the name of term has added a value added cost. Yet why not just call it term? That is what it is. The rip-off comment was not directed at you but to those carriers and agencies that have decided for some odd reason that Mortgage Insurance is a product undo itself, which it isn't.

 

[somarco]

Yes, some large operations have folded over the years. "Guaranteed" permanent coverage is as good as the company guaranteeing it, unless there is some agreement where a third party will guarantee it.

You must be unfamiliar with statutory reserve requirements, non-forfeiture values and the general way insurance carriers operate and interact with the departments that regulate them.

In all the years that carriers have operated, no one has lost a dime in principle and all legitimate death claims have been paid per contract.

Guaranteed means exactly what it says . . . guaranteed.

A stock company can provide an incentive for a person to cook the books, change long-term focus to short-term focus, etc. Even in the insurance industry, these companies are susceptible to the the Enron/Tyco/Worldcom syndrome, albeit the chances are slim with a large company

There is absolutely no comparison of the companies referenced above vs. the insurance industry. None.

Enron folds and there are no reserves to cover obligations. There are no regulatory agencies to step in and protect the stockholders.

That is not the case with carriers & their policyholders.

Before you start putting down the industry you claim to serve, you really should delve a bit into the history & structure of the contracts you are selling.

 

[somarco]

If this was a rip off, an insurance company wouldn't have created it.

What is your basis for this comment?

There are quite a few carriers that offer products that do not deliver good value to the consumer, and are mostly worthless when time comes to pay a claim.

 

[dvd493]

If this was a rip off, an insurance company wouldn't have created it.

What is your basis for this comment?

There are quite a few carriers that offer products that do not deliver good value to the consumer, and are mostly worthless when time comes to pay a claim.

somarco,

If you don't like that comment how about this one. If this was a rip off a customer wouldn't see value in it and make the purchase. We cant force them to submit to our will.

When it comes to paying a claim I have zero knowledge on that. I havn't been at this long enought to know the answer so I'll take your word for it. The only thing I would say is if a company is A rated, I don't think paying a claim would be a problem for them. Or am I wrong on that?

 

[somarco]

If this was a rip off a customer wouldn't see value in it and make the purchase

There are ignorant buyers and ignorant agents. Put the two together and you have the basis for peddling a product with little to no value to the consumer.

Some examples of products with little or no value include:

DI rider on mortgage protection life

unemployment riders

many critical illness riders

HIP's

stand alone Rx "copay" plans

insured dental plans (individual)

low face amount life insurance

"instant issue" life insurance

AD&D

title loans

payday loans

no money down mortgage loans

almost anything offered by MLM companies

buy here pay here automobiles

renting rooms by the week

Do you see a pattern?

The only thing I would say is if a company is A rated, I don't think paying a claim would be a problem for them.

The ability of a company to pay a claim has no relationship to their rating. There are plenty of B & C rated companies, as well as unrated companies, that have been paying claims for years.

Lloyds is an unrated carrier since they operate in the US as an underwriting syndicate and offer their products through surplus lines brokers. Do you doubt the ability of Lloyds to pay a claim?

 

[NHB_MMA]

How do we get from AIG is a B rated carrier to the "one size fits all" discussion? But while we're here, I am definitely not a one size fits all guy. And it works both ways. There are those that believe term is the only way to go. And there are those that believe permanent is the only way to go. My belief is whatever best fits the need the most cost efficient way is the right way to go.

Your comment was that my NYL bias was showing. For what it's worth, I haven't been there long enough to even witness a discussion/debate in a class about any other company. They have never addressed the mutual/stock pros/cons. It's a personal belief, and that of most of my family members, who have pretty much always purchased from mutual companies.

I just said I find that most people here have biases in general and that comment wasn't even addressing the "B rating" comment.

Problem is, some newbie or consumer stops by the forum and sees the info you posted and could assume you are right. I think the truth is worthy to be posted here.

You do have a legitimate point there, but I will say:

1. It was not intentional to imply it was an A.M. Best rating.

2. It has been addressed and answered, in an exhaustive manner. This dead horse has been beaten already. Anyone reading this thread would have CLEARLY understood that I corrected any misunderstanding or misstatement.

3. This is an "Agents" forum. The correct place for a consumer to put his questions regarding a product would be in the "Life" forum and the traffic here is probably 90% agents anyway. It is expected in an "Agents" forum that agents would debate and discuss the merits of companies and even stock versus mutual, though the information should be believed accurate.

4. Another sensible person that would inquire about a company on this forum would give consideration to the advice given, but would not base his decision entirely on this, or any other, forum.

I have no idea what the Weiss rating is for any of the AIG companies. I'd be curious to know which one it is you have stated has a C+ rating?

AIG Life Insurance Company, as cited in my reply to James.

So now we're talking about VUL's??? Where'd that come from? I have no problems with VUL's when sold in the proper situation.

What I meant was, you really seemed to take exception to me in this thread and I felt it was probably due to our debate over the VUL/Roth thing in that other thread. I felt like you were being a little personal. If that wasn't at all the case, I apologize for jumping to that conclusion and will again repeat I have no hostility towards you.

Man, stick with one argument. First we're talking about AIG and then we're talking about "fly-by-night operations. Whoever said anything about those carriers?

We didn't discuss those carriers specifically, but I was just referring to the stock versus mutual issue. Seems like many of those small companies some indies I've met (not referring to anyone here) like to sell for permanent coverage are stock companies and God only knows when they'll be gobbled up and ruined by the next Conseco.

I thought it was pretty clear from my statement that it didn't have anything to do with AIG and that the same level of concern is not there with AIG.

When you imply that someone is better off with a product from a mutual company than with a stock company, that to me is a falsehood. You call it what you want, and I'll call it what I want.

"Falsehood" is a pretty negative term that seems to imply some deception on my part, in the way it was used. When talking about stock vs. mutual, I don't believe I have ever worded it in a way that would be understood by anyone of reasonable intelligence to be anything other than my OPINION, and have always stated why I believe in it. There is no way anyone with common sense would read my statements and take them for God-given fact, but simply my perspective.

I just think when you're looking at equity that you want to be there for 50, 60, 70 years or longer, YOU should be the one voting. I prefer that to a shareholder that is looking to lose the shares (after a profitable run) faster than the frat boy ditches the fat girl he wakes up with on Saturday morning.

Don't get me wrong, I've seen policies with Northwestern Mutual that have done very well over the years with their dividends. But I can't make a blanket statement that a person is better off with a policy from a mutual company than a stock company. I also can't make a blanket statement that a person is better off with a stock company than a mutual company.

You previously mentioned pros and cons. What would be the advantage of a stock company, for the policyholder? I freely admit you have more industry experience and would like you thoughts on this.

An addition question I was wondering sman is where did you get started? What has your career track been and how have you get to where you are today? I am particularly curious because you're one of the few guys here that works with variable products, as I will soon do.

 

[NHB_MMA]

http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/content/Settlement.html

Obviously the SEC has noted problems with Weiss also. I read your link and this Weiss is something!

They seem like an okay company, but just ballbusters...which makes them much like the SEC.

The only major company I have found that got an A+ (the highest) rating from Weiss was State Farm. Northwestern, NYL, Mass, and the like could only manage an A rating.