- Thread starter
- #31
Kstein,
Great idea, I'm starting client out on an Mapd and I know hospitalization frequent.
Thanks
Great idea, I'm starting client out on an Mapd and I know hospitalization frequent.
Thanks
ESRD Regs/Medicare
- Thread starter asher
- Start date
- 4,137
I mean, with MAPD, sure.. I get it. However, KStein is saying do it with Med Sup at 65.. that's not serving your client.. that's selling them some B's they don't need. The majority of Medigap plans that you're going to offer are going to cover Part A.
Unless you plan to do HDG.. which is the only case I'd make for doing this.
- Thread starter
- #33
Yes, you're both quite clear.
I would never put an eligible esrd individual for comprhensive medigap on Hi-F
Better standard plan.
Thank you for your input.
I would never put an eligible esrd individual for comprhensive medigap on Hi-F
Better standard plan.
Thank you for your input.
- 4,137
Yeah... You're missing the point.
- 4,137
"Hey, you can score some extra money when you go into the hospital by paying for this hospital plan"
I mean, maybe for aftercare? I don't know. I wouldn't do it.. but whateve's
I mean, maybe for aftercare? I don't know. I wouldn't do it.. but whateve's
The handful of clients that have pocketed 5-10k every year or so while having 100% of their bills paid aren't questioning the logic of it. The deck is stacked against them insurancewise so why not offer as much as possible (within reason I'm talking about an $80-$150/mo gtl). They can always drop it in the future.
- 4,137
Overinsurance is a problem for the whole group, not just your client. The purpose of insurance is transfer of risk, not profiting off your medical condition. That's Insurance 100.
If your client is on fixed income. Paying that 80-150 until they "hit the jackpot" is reducing the funds they have available unnecessarily. That's a week of groceries. BAD
They're more apt to go to the hospital when they don't need to get that payday. That spends Medicare dollars, increases Medigap claims, and your Hospital Indemnity claims. Not to account for wasted resources for people that may actually need it. BAD.
If the insurance company is paying out 5-10 grand for your clients annually, they're jacking up rates to stay profitable for the group. Medigap is also increasing rates to cover claims. Medicare spends dollars that could be allocated elsewhere. BAD.
I get it's only a handful of clients, but multiple agents doing a handful of clients can cause major issues disrupting the market.
Last edited:
As they say in court, assumes facts not in evidence.
I can't justify adding anything to Medigap, especially hospital indemnity. And it does appear to be overkill.
But as June Cleaver said, Ward you were a bit hard on the Beaver
Last edited:
- 4,137
I edited it to make it less jerkish.
Agent indicated that they sells it to get extra money for the health issues, not because of additional need.
There is some assumption in fact, though. I don't know if they're fixed income. I also don't know about their medical care. Everything else is pretty well supported
Maybe I was a little bit harsh and for that I apologize. Not a justification by any means, I tend to write things as I'm thinking them and I could do better taking a few minutes to re-read before posting.
Last edited:
Similar threads
