Corebridge Financial won't pay death benefit

[DayTimer]

"Final payment" certainly implies that the policy was paid-up, but we can't be sure. The policy may have lapsed and that was just the last payment sent to them?

"Final Payment" does not necessarily mean paid up. It could mean dividends fully offset the premium so they stopped making payments.

I'm thinking that most likely this was a debit policy, and the agent came by to collect the next premium, the policy owner said he/she wanted to cash the policy in. The debt agent marked the last payment as "final payment." The owner then physically surrendered the policy to the agent.

@rousemark @shonceman @HomeService might offer an opinion here given the age of the policy and the age of those three agents

 

[rousemark]

"Final payment" certainly implies that the policy was paid-up, but we can't be sure. The policy may have lapsed and that was just the last payment sent to them?

It could have been cash surrendered after the policy was paid up. It is not unusual that the parents give the policy to the child after it is paid up and then child cashes it out.

 

[shonceman]

It was probably a 20 year paid up whole life policy. I agree with @rousemark that it was probably cashed in. Another possibility is that someone took out a loan and the interest on it ended up eating up all the cash value, thus terminating the policy. Since there's no record of the policy, it was apparently not assumed by the succeeding companies. The only reason they wouldn't assume it is if it were terminated.

 

[adjusterjack]

I should not bear the burden of the paperwork not moving efficiently between four companies.

Actually, you do. In our legal system a person making a "claim" for something has the burden of proving that "claim." In this case you would have to not only produce the policy, but would likely have to produce evidence of payments, like receipts or cancelled checks.

 

[titeye]

Actually, you do. In our legal system a person making a "claim" for something has the burden of proving that "claim." In this case you would have to not only produce the policy, but would likely have to produce evidence of payments, like receipts or cancelled checks.

Seriously!? That's a scary thought. What is the probability of gaining access to someone's banking information, if you're not the beneficiary on the account? What is the probability that someone will change banks more than once, twice, or three times even, in their lifetime, unbeknownst to the children and grandchildren? I have resided in several cities since I graduated from HS. I do not recall ever not changing banks, at least once in every one of those towns. I will say, that I do communicate with my niece regularly, concerning an insurance policy that I am paying on for her twin boys, in which I made her the owner. At some point, I also intend to converse with the grandnephews to help them understand their policies, cash values and teach them the value of saving and the power of compound interest, if I live long enough. However, that is the financial advisor in me speaking. Most people are not even financially literate, unfortunately, to have such conversations.

 

[Newby]

The policy could have been cashed out. Or lapsed.

"Final Payment" does not necessarily mean paid up. It could mean dividends fully offset the premium so they stopped making payments. Then sometime over the 50 years since then, dividends stopped and premiums needed to start again.

Without a policy number, there is no way to know. But it is very rare in my experience that a policy just "falls through the cracks" in an acquisition.

Final payment would never mean that dividends were going to carry the policy. Dividends are always non guaranteed. Any printed matter that ever stated that would be illegal and any agent that ever wrote that into a payment book would easily lose a lawsuit over that.

 

[scagnt83]

Final payment would never mean that dividends were going to carry the policy. Dividends are always non guaranteed. Any printed matter that ever stated that would be illegal and any agent that ever wrote that into a payment book would easily lose a lawsuit over that.

Your saying an agent has never done anything to violate insurance laws?

We both know plenty of agents would have written that in the book in that situation. Right wrong or otherwise.

What is technically correct, does not always happen in real life.

And we dont know who wrote that in the book. It could have been the client who wrote that. Without the actual facts, we are all just pontificating.

 

[adjusterjack]

Seriously!? That's a scary thought. What is the probability of gaining access to someone's banking information, if you're not the beneficiary on the account? What is the probability that someone will change banks more than once, twice, or three times even, in their lifetime, unbeknownst to the children and grandchildren? I have resided in several cities since I graduated from HS. I do not recall ever not changing banks, at least once in every one of those towns.

One should not be buying life insurance on children unless one is willing to safeguard the policies and keep meticulous payment records. Noting a payment in a premium book is no more evidence of payment than my checking account register is evidence that I paid my electric bill.

 

[DHK]

Let's not forget that insurance companies also have the responsibility of keeping track of policy holders through the use of the Master Death File. Of course, that only applies to in-force policies that the company knows about, but I'm just throwing that in regarding the responsibility of insurers.

https://www.iii.org/article/fact-sheet-unclaimed-life-insurance-policies

 

[shonceman]

One should not be buying life insurance on children unless one is willing to safeguard the policies and keep meticulous payment records. Noting a payment in a premium book is no more evidence of payment than my checking account register is evidence that I paid my electric bill.

The Premium Receipt Book isn't like a checkbook register. It's more like the books the bank used to give you for your savings account. Those savings books were updated by the teller, not the account holder. Similarly, the PRB is updated and initialed by the agent, not the policyholder. If an audit is ever done on that account, the PRB is absolutely proof to the company that the agent collected those premiums. If the book disagrees with the company records, the book rules.