Corebridge Financial won't pay death benefit

[scagnt83]

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.

That is not necessarily true.

As licensed professionals, we are required (and expected) to know the laws and regulations surrounding the products we sell and service. It was part of our licensing exam, we took a test on many of those laws. And we take CE classes that cover many aspects of insurance law that we did not test on.

That does not mean we are giving legal opinion. We share legal FACTS. There are certain facts that are black and white in the law, that an insurance agent is expected to know. (such as the 30 day free look period, or 2y contestability period, rebating laws, marketing regulations, etc. etc. etc.)

Just like the debit book issue..... debit agents are expected to know that the debit book is an official statement from the carrier that qualifies as proof of payment. That is a legal fact that a licensed agent is qualified to speak to. (I did not know that myself, its something new I learned from this thread)

Its no different than an agent saying the DB is income tax free, or that CV can be taken via Loans income tax free. Or saying that the gains in a NQ Annuity are taxable as income. The agent is not acting as a tax advisor.... its not tax advice... its factual info about the product they are licensed to sell.

Then there are all the insurance related issues/knowledge than an attorney, even one specializing in insurance litigation, does not know. That is why they bring in expert witnesses to speak to the FACTS.

For example, I have a client who is an engineer expert witness. Attorneys bring him in to testify about building laws/codes/regs. He is an expert in those laws.... and why those laws exist .... the attorney who specializes in construction litigation is not an expert in building laws/codes.... they bring in the expert to provide the FACTS about those laws ... and the attorneys litigate how the facts impact the situation.

 

[PrivClientSG]

That is not necessarily true.

As licensed professionals, we are required (and expected) to know the laws and regulations surrounding the products we sell and service. It was part of our licensing exam, we took a test on many of those laws. And we take CE classes that cover many aspects of insurance law that we did not test on.

That does not mean we are giving legal opinion. We share legal FACTS. There are certain facts that are black and white in the law, that an insurance agent is expected to know. (such as the 30 day free look period, or 2y contestability period, rebating laws, marketing regulations, etc. etc. etc.)

Just like the debit book issue..... debit agents are expected to know that the debit book is an official statement from the carrier that qualifies as proof of payment. That is a legal fact that a licensed agent is qualified to speak to. (I did not know that myself, its something new I learned from this thread)

Its no different than an agent saying the DB is income tax free, or that CV can be taken via Loans income tax free. Or saying that the gains in a NQ Annuity are taxable as income. The agent is not acting as a tax advisor.... its not tax advice... its factual info about the product they are licensed to sell.

Then there are all the insurance related issues/knowledge than an attorney, even one specializing in insurance litigation, does not know. That is why they bring in expert witnesses to speak to the FACTS.

For example, I have a client who is an engineer expert witness. Attorneys bring him in to testify about building laws/codes/regs. He is an expert in those laws.... and why those laws exist .... the attorney who specializes in construction litigation is not an expert in building laws/codes.... they bring in the expert to provide the FACTS about those laws ... and the attorneys litigate how the facts impact the situation.

You're collapsing issues and usage, but that's OK. There are missing facts here and people giving legal opinions as to what the insurance company must do and what the client must do. I say that's giving legal opinion. You say it isn't. We just disagree. Let's each professional here copy the entire thread and said it to their compliance department. I am just curious what they might say, LOL. Like I said, have at it folks.

 

[PrivClientSG]

Also, being an expert witness has nothing to do with legal opinions, giving legal advice, or speaking to legal issues. I've been an expert witness for over 20 years and never once did my legal background come into play, nor was I solicited for legal advice, legal opinion, to interpret a contract, and so on and so on. That is going to be insurance and product KNOWLEDGE and EXPERTISE, not LEGAL. That's my only point. Distinction.

 

[PrivClientSG]

And btw, I am not saying anyone is wrong. Like I said, have at it. I just pointed out an observation and voiced that. It's just there for anyone or everyone to agree or disagree with. But I am not saying anyone is wrong. Just like everyone -- opinions vary, LOL.

 

[scagnt83]

You're collapsing issues and usage, but that's OK. There are missing facts here and people giving legal opinions as to what the insurance company must do and what the client must do. I say that's giving legal opinion. You say it isn't. We just disagree. Let's each professional here copy the entire thread and said it to their compliance department. I am just curious what they might say, LOL. Like I said, have at it folks.

I get what you mean. I think at times there is a fine line between the two issues. So us agents would be wise not to tread too close to that line.

I think you were speaking to a specific post or two and I took it as a more generalized comment.

 

[scagnt83]

Also, being an expert witness has nothing to do with legal opinions, giving legal advice, or speaking to legal issues. I've been an expert witness for over 20 years and never once did my legal background come into play, nor was I solicited for legal advice, legal opinion, to interpret a contract, and so on and so on. That is going to be insurance and product KNOWLEDGE and EXPERTISE, not LEGAL. That's my only point. Distinction.

There is a difference between legal opinion and legal facts. Opinions are to be litigated. Facts are facts.

Its a legal fact that NQ Annuity gains are taxed as earned income when withdrawn.

It is a legal opinion that an agent or carrier failed suitability or best interest laws by failing to properly disclose that legal fact at time of sale.

It would be legal opinion that the client was harmed by the omission of that legal fact at time of sale and should sue.

One is black and white. The other is opinion to be litigated based on the facts.