California LTCi Bill

[VolAgent]

I know this is LTC but and maybe something has changed, but in 2004 I called all 8 health carriers in MD asking for specimen policies. One said yes. The other 7 acted like I was calling Coke and asking for the secret recipe.

I can really only speak from life, but they are readily attainable. When I was with Mass, I believe they made theirs available for LTCi, although I may be mistaken.

Now, most home office folks really don't have a clue as again, no one asks. But usually you can find someone who knows what you are talking about and get it. After all, these things are filed with the state, no reason they can't provide it.

 

[Mr_Ed]

I can really only speak from life, but they are readily attainable. When I was with Mass, I believe they made theirs available for LTCi, although I may be mistaken.

Now, most home office folks really don't have a clue as again, no one asks. But usually you can find someone who knows what you are talking about and get it. After all, these things are filed with the state, no reason they can't provide it.

when i was a captive agent i found it odd that my management refused to give us specimen policies. They made it sound like it was the insurer's decision to not allow specimen policies to be given to consumers, therefore, they couldn't give them to us either.

i always thought that was strange.

i was very pleased when i became an independent agent that all the insurers were happy to give me a specimen policy--all I had to do was ask for it.

 

[ltcadviser]

Well said Arthur, well said.

And regarding policy language, I have yet to meet a company that doesn't make specimen policies available for every product. The problem is, no one ever asks to see them, agents or consumers.

Are you kidding?

I have clients that ask me for specimen policies all of the time.

 

[VolAgent]

when i was a captive agent i found it odd that my management refused to give us specimen policies. They made it sound like it was the insurer's decision to not allow specimen policies to be given to consumers, therefore, they couldn't give them to us either.

i always thought that was strange.

i was very pleased when i became an independent agent that all the insurers were happy to give me a specimen policy--all I had to do was ask for it.

My experience was completely different. Specimens were readily available online. Now, up to you if you want to print it off, but it was there.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Are you kidding?

I have clients that ask me for specimen policies all of the time.

Maybe that is because I do life and not LTC? I don't know, but maybe 1% asks to see a specimen policy.

 

[moonlightandmargaritas]

"Without this legislation, consumers, many on fixed incomes..."

Typical pandering. Whether they're on a fixed income or not has nothing to do with it.

 

[2insureyou]

I happen to be in Indiana, and while you make some valid points, Mr. Ed, I also wonder long-term (no pun intended) how some of the regulations in effect in this state, on a still relatively young product line, will impact the industry and the state as well.

For example, not to go off topic, but Indiana is one of 2 or 3 states that offers unlimited asset protection through the partnership plan. Other states limit it to a specific amount of protected assets. While there's no questions the partnership plan will help limit some exposure for Medicaid in Indiana as well as other places, there's a reason other states didn't make it unlimited.

I tend to agree more with Arthur that, what's bad for the companies will eventually be passed on to the consumer, but I also do agree to some extent there must be some protections in place for the consumer.

A balance between caveat emptor and caveat vendor, if you will...

And, for the record, I have no hard, fast opinion on the matter, if anyone is keeping track of such matters.

 

[Mr_Ed]

I happen to be in Indiana, and while you make some valid points, Mr. Ed, I also wonder long-term (no pun intended) how some of the regulations in effect in this state, on a still relatively young product line, will impact the industry and the state as well.

For example, not to go off topic, but Indiana is one of 2 or 3 states that offers unlimited asset protection through the partnership plan. Other states limit it to a specific amount of protected assets. While there's no questions the partnership plan will help limit some exposure for Medicaid in Indiana as well as other places, there's a reason other states didn't make it unlimited.

I tend to agree more with Arthur that, what's bad for the companies will eventually be passed on to the consumer, but I also do agree to some extent there must be some protections in place for the consumer.

A balance between caveat emptor and caveat vendor, if you will...

And, for the record, I have no hard, fast opinion on the matter, if anyone is keeping track of such matters.

it's amazing how so many insurance agents are duped into thinking that the ltc insurers are "barely squeaking out a profit" on their ltci blocks.

 

[2insureyou]

it's amazing how so many insurance agents are duped into thinking that the ltc insurers are "barely squeaking out a profit" on their ltci blocks.

Wait a minute... if the insurer is rolling in profit, then why the rate increases, policy design changes, and companies dropping out?

They may not just be squeaking out a profit, but they're not squeaking out enough for their actuaries to feel confident...

Hence my concern for the state regulating such activity as California is proposing on rate increases, and hence the reason I'm concerned about the long-term impact of an unlimited asset protection on the Medicaid system in Indiana vs. a set limit on asset protection as offered in other states...

Not to cross over in to topics covered in other threads, but there is some inconsistent logic being applied across the way here.

 

[csalter]

I am not surprised by this bill. I had posted not even two weeks ago on this forum about how I noticed that Calfornia seems to be discerning about rate increases and boom there's this. I do believe that insurances companies will continue to leave Calfornia or they will be forced to better underwrite the policies.

I believe that only leaves NY Life, Genworth, and Bankers Life as the only partnership carriers in California.

In any case, I feel fortunate to have my policy already.

 

[Mr_Ed]

Wait a minute... if the insurer is rolling in profit, then why the rate increases, policy design changes, and companies dropping out?

They may not just be squeaking out a profit, but they're not squeaking out enough for their actuaries to feel confident...

Hence my concern for the state regulating such activity as California is proposing on rate increases, and hence the reason I'm concerned about the long-term impact of an unlimited asset protection on the Medicaid system in Indiana vs. a set limit on asset protection as offered in other states...

Not to cross over in to topics covered in other threads, but there is some inconsistent logic being applied across the way here.

they can request and get approved rate increases even when they are making a profit.