Corebridge Financial won't pay death benefit

First, unless people here are practicing attorneys, there shouldn't be all this bantering and bickering about "the law" and "legal" and so forth. Second, I can't speak to Indiana specifically, nor does anyone have to at this point, however, I would make sure that your letter/correspondence, and all of the documentation you sent, was specifically sent to Amy Beard. She is the Indiana Department of Insurance Commissioner. Not that it means anything, but two things. One, I heard her speak and was impressed with her knowledge, approach, mindset, etc. Second, while people may discount this, every single matter I've ever had with any State DOI, started with the Commissioner. Every attorney involved, every expert involved, and in my professional opinion and experience -- every single person said, "Start with the Commissioner." No, it won't live and die there, won't stay there permanently, etc. -- but that doesn't matter. Start with the Commissioner. Period.

Commissioner Beard was an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), was the Chief Deputy Commissioner and General Counsel for the Department, and she also worked with NAIC and IIPRC. I would also speak with an attorney (and you have to decide whether or not it's financially feasible) who might want to author the letter, but can certainly cut through a great deal of the red tape,bureaucracy, and BS, you might face.

That said, yes, insurance companies do have obligations (legal and otherwise) as to responsibilities, and up to a point, this is one of them. However, at a certain point, you will have responsibilities to. I won't speak to burden of proof issues, who has what, who has more, and so forth -- because only a lawyer can speak to that and have a qualified opinion or statement of fact, if possible.

If you document everything possible that you have, I believe at some point, the DOI will advocate for you, and you can hopefully get accountability -- which is what you are looking for -- and some answers.

One last note -- I do think it's possible that this was a "paid up" or "endowed" policy, where the monies were "paid out" so to speak. Good luck and all the best!
 
One last note -- I do think it's possible that this was a "paid up" or "endowed" policy, where the monies were "paid out" so to speak. Good luck and all the best!
Oh, yeah. I didn't think of an endowment policy. Yes, it could have been an endowment policy. They were pretty commonly sold as a college fund vehicle at one time. They were terrible as a savings vehicle! But they did also provide a death benefit prior to endowment, so there is that!
 
First, unless people here are practicing attorneys, there shouldn't be all this bantering and bickering about "the law" and "legal" and so forth.

It's fully expected of insurance agents to understand the insurance code and the law surrounding insurance matters. There's an entire course in CLU called "Life Insurance Law".

What we cannot do is draft documents, represent clients in court, or any other activity that could be considered the "unauthorized practice of law".
 
Oh, yeah. I didn't think of an endowment policy. Yes, it could have been an endowment policy. They were pretty commonly sold as a college fund vehicle at one time. They were terrible as a savings vehicle! But they did also provide a death benefit prior to endowment, so there is that!
I didn't think of it either. It has many years since we sold the 10, 15, 20 year endowments on kids.
 
It's fully expected of insurance agents to understand the insurance code and the law surrounding insurance matters. There's an entire course in CLU called "Life Insurance Law".

What we cannot do is draft documents, represent clients in court, or any other activity that could be considered the "unauthorized practice of law".

You can think that all you want, but at the end of the day, interpreting, opining, assigning burden of proof, legal responsibilities and obligations, etc. -- an insurance professional can do that all the want. That and $5 gets you a nice cup on coffee at Starbucks. But an attorney can and will give a "qualified" opinion -- an expert opinion -- and can sign his name to it, as well as represent a person in that legal process. Like I always say, opinions vary. LOL.
 
But an attorney can and will give a "qualified" opinion -- an expert opinion -- and can sign his name to it, as well as represent a person in that legal process. Like I always say, opinions vary. LOL.

We are in the business of contracts. Understanding contract responsibilities between an insurer and a policyholder is part of our job. If there's a contract to be read, the terms are in the contract and the public relies on agents to ensure that the client understands the terms and provisions in such contracts.

Without a contract... it's awfully hard to determine such things, right?

Now, enforcing when one party hasn't fulfilled their obligation... agents cannot force one party to do something for the other. An attorney can threaten and perform legal action. The agent... can only promise that legal action would be the next step.
 
Look, you guys want to talk law, practice law, interpret law, whatever it is you want to call it -- go have at it. No problem at all. I'll just choose not to. Nothing more, nothing less. It's a bulletin board, LOL.
 
You can think that all you want, but at the end of the day, interpreting, opining, assigning burden of proof, legal responsibilities and obligations, etc. -- an insurance professional can do that all the want. That and $5 gets you a nice cup on coffee at Starbucks. But an attorney can and will give a "qualified" opinion -- an expert opinion -- and can sign his name to it, as well as represent a person in that legal process. Like I always say, opinions vary. LOL.
Most attorney's know absolutely nothing about insurance. And this is a tiny case if it even pans out to be anything at all. Paying Perry Mason's fee to be told this policy already paid out in 1967 isn't going to make sense.
 
Back
Top