Family First Life won't release me.

[DonP]

So in Kentucky if your replace a 3 yr old policy and they die 6 months later its incontestable right? Wow that's huge liability for a small carrier . A bad agent gets in their and clean sheets a ton of policy's he could really hurt a small carrier.

 

[jdeasy]

So in Kentucky if your replace a 3 yr old policy and they die 6 months later its incontestable right? Wow that's huge liability for a small carrier . A bad agent gets in their and clean sheets a ton of policy's he could really hurt a small carrier.

How could an agent really clean sheet today with all the info out there?

maybe on smoking?

That's about it. I had one offered modified today and another flat declined.

what difference would it have made if they were clean sheeted. They wouldn't have been approved.

one particular imo based in Ky is notorious for clean sheeting.

doesn't seem to have affected their primary company.

but I'm not an agent blamer for company problems.

these companies don't need help from agents to screw up.

there's 3 states that share the same rules as Ky.

I don't see or hear of problems there either.

 

[jdeasy]

Ok..

What company would you lead off with for a call center?

No idea. I don't run a call center and won't be.

But if AmAm is top of the market for that kinda thing then it says all that needs to be said about call centers.

 

[HoosierLife]

No idea. I don't run a call center and won't be.

But if AmAm is top of the market for that kinda thing then it says all that needs to be said about call centers.

Lol

 

[goillini52]

Has nothing to do with our replacement rules.

I replace just as many in Indiana and Tn.


I do know that AmAm has great upline contracts. Thus, the uplines sell their souls and tout it.

Kinda like you with one particular company when you were with us. Then when you became an upline at another imo you were back on board with that piece of shat company and pimping them like nobody's business.

I get it, that's what y'all do. If it works for you then good on you.

Just don't try to sell me on that BS.

I really missed this "telling it like it is". Glad you're back.

 

[DigitalBGA.com]

I've been with FFL for about 6 months. It was my first IMO, so I just didn't know what I didn't know. They have lots of marketing that advertises very clearly "no contracts", but now that I want to leave, they have this one-sided contract that I must sign. Big lesson learned here.

I was hoping to join @JRoot over at Digital BGA for final expense telesales, but one of the carriers they need is locked up with FFL for at least another 4 months.

I'd appreciate any suggestions on how to get out of FFL without signing their one-sided contract or what other options I should explore? Thanks.

We can still assist as long as we can get several other core carriers of ours. One missing is not a big deal, just wait it out.

That said, FFL releases require a new IMO to accept all risk of past business even though new IMO didn't partake in any revenues from that business. Zero chance we, or any IMO, should sign such a one sided agreement.

 

[Jason Hall]

We can still assist as long as we can get several other core carriers of ours. One missing is not a big deal, just wait it out..

Perfect!

That said, FFL releases require a new IMO to accept all risk of past business even though new IMO didn't partake in any revenues from that business. Zero chance we, or any IMO, should sign such a one sided agreement.

Good point. I don't blame any IMO for not signing it. After FFL brags about "no contracts" to join, they really have a nonsensical contract to leave. Anyone wanting to join FFL needs to understand what it looks like when they leave.

 

[WinoBlues]

"no contracts" to join, they really have a nonsensical contract to leave.

It is called the Hotel California contract.

 

[Newby]

We can still assist as long as we can get several other core carriers of ours. One missing is not a big deal, just wait it out.

That said, FFL releases require a new IMO to accept all risk of past business even though new IMO didn't partake in any revenues from that business. Zero chance we, or any IMO, should sign such a one sided agreement.

I disagree. That has always been the ONE requirement that I require on releases also AND is the standard verbiage on the release forms that all of us have used for years.
When an agency/IMO releases an agent they should have no further debt risk on that agent. They have ZERO control over that agent once they release and a slim chance of collecting on any debts. If that agent goes flipping all his previous biz (which is common with agents who jump around) the debts need to roll up to the new current IMO not the old one that was nice enough to release him.
The IMO that is accepting the agent needs to do their due diligence on the agent before they accept him. If the agent is not rock solid I don't accept his contracts. I just start him with new companies for that very reason.
But the IMO requesting the agent needs to be the one on the hook 100% for debts from the day of the release on. Because you have the most chance of collecting any debts from your agent.

 

[toolbelt]

Family First means they'll take your family members first if you attempt to leave.