Dislodging UL Policies for FE Coverage

[jdeasy]

Rather misleading for the client in my honest opinion. Although true and its sales, but misleading. With current assumption their chance of having their policy lapse is almost none? Especially if they have been slightly over funding for some time.

Unless they were genuinely concerned about it with out me blowing it out of proportion. I would feel like I accomplished nothing but the lining of my pockets and sticking an old lady with a huge premium she didn't need.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but It's certainly not every day clients jump out of their seat to pay 4x the premium to have cash value.

There is no way, never, no how that an UL is better for FE in any circumstance. UL has it's place, but that place is not for FE.

If you think it is you are either clueless or a marketer for UL.

 

[rousemark]

There is no way, never, no how that an UL is better for FE in any circumstance. UL has it's place, but that place is not for FE.

If you think it is you are either clueless or a marketer for UL.

So you walk in on a 5 - 10 year old UL issued on a preferred rate that is GUARANTEED to age 121 at current premium, it is better to replace it with a FE WL that matures at age 121 which has a higher premium because the client is 5 years older and the WL is rated at table 4... Don't think so.

There are cases where the agent better serves the client by saying, "what you have is great.. Keep it and don't let anybody talk you out of it" rather than going after the commission.

Having said all that, there are times when replacement is beneficial for many different reasons but you can't say that there never instances where the UL is better than the F.E.

 

[jdeasy]

So you walk in on a 5 - 10 year old UL issued on a preferred rate that is GUARANTEED to age 121 at current premium, it is better to replace it with a FE WL that matures at age 121 which has a higher premium because the client is 5 years older and the WL is rated at table 4... Don't think so.

There are cases where the agent better serves the client by saying, "what you have is great.. Keep it and don't let anybody talk you out of it" rather than going after the commission.

Having said all that, there are times when replacement is beneficial for many different reasons but you can't say that there never instances where the UL is better than the F.E.

Since that's not what I said, get off your high horse. If I can't improve a person's situation I do not change anything. There's many times I tell a person to keep what they have.

I would have never put them in a UL for FE in the first place. But, in the unlikely event that I run into someone that has what you described I most likely could put them into a fully underwritten whole life at the same rate or better.

And, if the person that had this great deal sent in a reply card it's probably because they don't think it's so great.

Again, I would never sell someone UL for FE. It's a very rare situation where I would sell UL at all.

 

[Biggin]

Since that's not what I said, get off your high horse. If I can't improve a person's situation I do not change anything. There's many times I tell a person to keep what they have.

I would have never put them in a UL for FE in the first place. But, in the unlikely event that I run into someone that has what you described I most likely could put them into a fully underwritten whole life at the same rate or better.

And, if the person that had this great deal sent in a reply card it's probably because they don't think it's so great.

Again, I would never sell someone UL for FE. It's a very rare situation where I would sell UL at all.

Hey JD, how many people that you wrote FE policies for last year would get issued PREFERRED for a GUL to 121? Not many, is my guess. I think that most life insurance guys just don't understand the FE market. And think that if you sell a FE policy that you just slammed someone into a high price life insurance so you can make a huge commission. FE is different than any other life insurance market and you don't use the same tools. The scenario of a FE client getting issued preferred for a GUL to 121 is about like seeing a unicorn crap in your front yard. CAN it happen? Maybe, but I wouldn't make it part of your career plan. If nothing in the FE market were as it currently is, then a GUL to 121 could be the way to go.

I just see lots of life insurance guys dump all over FE policies because they read an illustration once. I certainly wouldn't hop on over to the Life insurance forum and try to fit final expense policies into an estate plan. Different markets.

 

[rousemark]

Since that's not what I said, get off your high horse. If I can't improve a person's situation I do not change anything. There's many times I tell a person to keep what they have.

I would have never put them in a UL for FE in the first place. But, in the unlikely event that I run into someone that has what you described I most likely could put them into a fully underwritten whole life at the same rate or better.

And, if the person that had this great deal sent in a reply card it's probably because they don't think it's so great.

Again, I would never sell someone UL for FE. It's a very rare situation where I would sell UL at all.

Wasn't on a high horse and apologize for coming across that way. Just trying to point out there are times that generalizations don't hold true.

The conversation here really wasn't about "selling" UL for final expense but "replacing" and "existing" UL with a SI WL. Unless, the UL is one that the agent sold being grossly underfunded, heavily loaned against, etc. replacement may not be called for. Not all UL are in danger of "crashing".

If, as you are talking about, the occasion is selling a new policy or replacing a policy written at the same insured age, then normally in order to get the UL gurantee to age 121, it will cost about as much as a WL. In that case, the WL would certainly be the best way to go, especailly if the client doesn't want a physical, detailed questions, etc.

As for sending in the card, you would know better than I there are all sorts of reasons that people reply other than actually wanting to buy or replace their insurance..

 

[jdeasy]

Wasn't on a high horse and apologize for coming across that way. Just trying to point out there are times that generalizations don't hold true.

The conversation here really wasn't about "selling" UL for final expense but "replacing" and "existing" UL with a SI WL. Unless, the UL is one that the agent sold being grossly underfunded, heavily loaned against, etc. replacement may not be called for. Not all UL are in danger of "crashing".

If, as you are talking about, the occasion is selling a new policy or replacing a policy written at the same insured age, then normally in order to get the UL gurantee to age 121, it will cost about as much as a WL. In that case, the WL would certainly be the best way to go, especailly if the client doesn't want a physical, detailed questions, etc.

As for sending in the card, you would know better than I there are all sorts of reasons that people reply other than actually wanting to buy or replace their insurance..

No apology neccesary. But, thanks anyway.

As far as why people send in the cards, it is my opinion and thought process that everyone that sends it in does indeed want life insurance. Just as i believe that every person that schedules an appointment with me intends to buy life insurance.

 

[BenS]

So you walk in on a 5 - 10 year old UL issued on a preferred rate that is GUARANTEED to age 121 at current premium, it is better to replace it with a FE WL that matures at age 121 which has a higher premium because the client is 5 years older and the WL is rated at table 4... Don't think so.

There are cases where the agent better serves the client by saying, "what you have is great.. Keep it and don't let anybody talk you out of it" rather than going after the commission.

Having said all that, there are times when replacement is beneficial for many different reasons but you can't say that there never instances where the UL is better than the F.E.

Forgive me if I'm totally off base here, as I'm new to the business...

Don't UL life policies only have CV if they are over-funded? The reason I ask is because one of the reasons I pitch WL as being better is the CV. When dealing with seniors, they can get older and possibly close their bank account while forgetting about the premium auto pay, or not have the funds ready to make a payment. I've told them that having the CV is important to keeping their policy intact in case they miss payments.

With the UL products that are being pitched to seniors, I haven't seen any that have CV or any no-lapse riders. That is a huge red flag for me.

Feel free to blow me out of the water if I missed something. I'm still learning!

 

[WinoBlues]

Forgive me if I'm totally off base here, as I'm new to the business...

Don't UL life policies only have CV if they are over-funded? The reason I ask is because one of the reasons I pitch WL as being better is the CV. When dealing with seniors, they can get older and possibly close their bank account while forgetting about the premium auto pay, or not have the funds ready to make a payment. I've told them that having the CV is important to keeping their policy intact in case they miss payments.

With the UL products that are being pitched to seniors, I haven't seen any that have CV or any no-lapse riders. That is a huge red flag for me.

Feel free to blow me out of the water if I missed something. I'm still learning!

That is true. CV can be very important to some seniors in keeping the policy inforce. That also brings up something else. Disability. If you write a working person age 50 do you add a WP rider?

Edit: you are about half correct on UL. It is a more complicated product than SIWL. I do not think any one will knock you for asking about it. Just be open to receiving the information. That is how we all learn.
Thanks

 

[rousemark]

Forgive me if I'm totally off base here, as I'm new to the business...

Don't UL life policies only have CV if they are over-funded? The reason I ask is because one of the reasons I pitch WL as being better is the CV. When dealing with seniors, they can get older and possibly close their bank account while forgetting about the premium auto pay, or not have the funds ready to make a payment. I've told them that having the CV is important to keeping their policy intact in case they miss payments.

With the UL products that are being pitched to seniors, I haven't seen any that have CV or any no-lapse riders. That is a huge red flag for me.

Feel free to blow me out of the water if I missed something. I'm still learning!

Actually UL will build CV if they are not "Underfunded"... That is the problem with the old ULs and why they are crashing.. The agents went out and sold minimum premium based on the current assumptions to keep the policy in force when interest rates were much higher than now. Whe3n interest rates dropped (and some companies increased the COI) the policies run out of cash value and die. They did this in order to sell the lowest possible premium..It is sad to see that agents learned nothing from the experience, many UL are still being sold the same way.

Just learned of a case where an AGLA agent replaced an AGLA WL that I sold about 4 years ago with a UL. He minimum premiumed the thing in order to reduce the amount the client paid. It is going to crash even on current assumptions if the guy lives to be 80. (age 77 gtd) His wife's cannot last beyond 85 (she is now 64). I can't call on him but might see if reardon wants to give him a call.

 

[WinoBlues]

Actually UL will build CV if they are not "Underfunded"... That is the problem with the old ULs and why they are crashing.. The agents went out and sold minimum premium based on the current assumptions to keep the policy in force when interest rates were much higher than now. Whe3n interest rates dropped (and some companies increased the COI) the policies run out of cash value and die. They did this in order to sell the lowest possible premium..It is sad to see that agents learned nothing from the experience, many UL are still being sold the same way.

Just learned of a case where an AGLA agent replaced an AGLA WL that I sold about 4 years ago with a UL. He minimum premiumed the thing in order to reduce the amount the client paid. It is going to crash even on current assumptions if the guy lives to be 80. (age 77 gtd) His wife's cannot last beyond 85 (she is now 64). I can't call on him but might see if reardon wants to give him a call.

Just curious, Why can't you call on them?