Another Prime Example Of A Sales Person Rather Than An Agent!

[jmatos]

Why it is our responsibility to educate our prospective clients! You know they aren't going to read the policy, and you shouldn't expect them to. When Agents do their job in the field, it makes for success down the road. Bad news travels faster than good news.

 

[jdeasy]

I love to bash Bankers as much as anyone, but I fail to see how the agent can be blamed in this case.

According to the son they were contesting the claim unneccesarily and with condition the lady didn't have.

Would it have been the agent's responsibility to put conditions the lady didn't have on the application?

 

[jmatos]

I love to bash Bankers as much as anyone, but I fail to see how the agent can be blamed in this case.

According to the son they were contesting the claim unneccesarily and with condition the lady didn't have.

Would it have been the agent's responsibility to put conditions the lady didn't have on the application?

The Insurance Company is exercising the right they have to use the 2 Year Contestable Clause....imo the agent should have educated them on this....Maybe I am wrong.

 

[medsuptage]

The Insurance Company is exercising the right they have to use the 2 Year Contestable Clause....imo the agent should have educated them on this....Maybe I am wrong.

Pretty sure the contestability clause doesn't apply to lying on the application.

If you blatantly lie about health issues your claim can be denied any time 2 years, 5 years, 20 years.

If she did in fact lie that's her fault not the companies or agents.

I'm certainly not a fan of bankers but you can't play the blame game if your the one that lied.

Also, I'm not entirely sure on this but, I don't think an insurance company even has to refund your premium if they deny your claim because you lied on the application.

 

[VolAgent]

The Insurance Company is exercising the right they have to use the 2 Year Contestable Clause....imo the agent should have educated them on this....Maybe I am wrong.

Yes, but that means the insured lied or withheld health or other information relevant to the underwriting

I got about halfway through and saw her son swear she never had heart problems. So again, how is this the agent's fault the company is incorrectly contesting the claim?

Insurance companies don't have the right to refuse all claims in the first two year. They can only contest when information was withheld that would have had an impact on the decision to offer coverage.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Also, I'm not entirely sure on this but, I don't think an insurance company even has to refund your premium if they deny your claim because you lied on the application.

Yes, they have to refund. It is treated as if the policy never existed. Thus they have no right to keep the premiums.

 

[taterpeeler]

I have delt with several health companies that have a 2 year contestable clause

 

[STIBROKER]

send them some doughnuts....that should do the trick.........

 

[rousemark]

Pretty sure the contestability clause doesn't apply to lying on the application.

If you blatantly lie about health issues your claim can be denied any time 2 years, 5 years, 20 years.

If she did in fact lie that's her fault not the companies or agents.

I'm certainly not a fan of bankers but you can't play the blame game if your the one that lied.

Also, I'm not entirely sure on this but, I don't think an insurance company even has to refund your premium if they deny your claim because you lied on the application.

Don't know of any state that has a contestable period longer than two years. After that period, the company cannot contest the claim even if they can show a person blatantly lied on the application about their health. There are very few exceptions to the incontestability.. one is if you lie about your age (the policies have provisions to adjust benefits for the correct age) and another is having man imposter apply for the policy or take the exam..

 

[Newby]

I think that life insurance companies should have to disclose what % of their deaths during the 1st 2 years result in paying the death claim. Some companies are real bad on this. They should have to expose that to the consumer when they are making a buying decision.

The only company I know of that discloses it now is Settlers. They pay around 99% of them so they make a flyer every year to show consumers. The only problem is consumers don't know how good that is compared to companies like Bankers and other bottom feeders.

 

[JFBAgent]

IMHO...

I've been in homes where the Bankers Agent simply didn't ask troublesome questions or checked "no" anyway. Also, Bankers claims department has a long history of denying claims.

This policy was a simplified issue whole life. It's either accept or deny, no rating, Table 4 issued to standard on this product. About 8 questions and an MIB check is all. Bankers branch managers are notorious for calling higher up and putting pressure to issue a policy for quota and bonus reasons and "damn the torpedoes" with underwriting.

On another note, anyone ever notice how it's the smallest clients that cause the biggest headaches?